Notes on Trump 61 Splodey Heads Splode

Posted on by

I don’t have time to write an analysis.

This official explanation from twitter speaks for itself and needs no comment.

Overview

On January 8, 2021, President Donald J. Trump tweeted:

“The 75,000,000 great American Patriots who voted for me, AMERICA FIRST, and MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN, will have a GIANT VOICE long into the future. They will not be disrespected or treated unfairly in any way, shape or form!!!”

Shortly thereafter, the President tweeted:

“To all of those who have asked, I will not be going to the Inauguration on January 20th.”

Due to the ongoing tensions in the United States, and an uptick in the global conversation in regards to the people who violently stormed the Capitol on January 6, 2021, these two Tweets must be read in the context of broader events in the country and the ways in which the President’s statements can be mobilized by different audiences, including to incite violence, as well as in the context of the pattern of behavior from this account in recent weeks. After assessing the language in these Tweets against our Glorification of Violence policy, we have determined that these Tweets are in violation of the Glorification of Violence Policy and the user @realDonaldTrump should be immediately permanently suspended from the service.

Assessment

We assessed the two Tweets referenced above under our Glorification of Violence policy, which aims to prevent the glorification of violence that could inspire others to replicate violent acts and determined that they were highly likely to encourage and inspire people to replicate the criminal acts that took place at the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021.

This determination is based on a number of factors, including:

President Trump’s statement that he will not be attending the Inauguration is being received by a number of his supporters as further confirmation that the election was not legitimate and is seen as him disavowing his previous claim made via two Tweets (1, 2) by his Deputy Chief of Staff, Dan Scavino, that there would be an “orderly transition” on January 20th.

The second Tweet may also serve as encouragement to those potentially considering violent acts that the Inauguration would be a “safe” target, as he will not be attending.

The use of the words “American Patriots” to describe some of his supporters is also being interpreted as support for those committing violent acts at the US Capitol.

The mention of his supporters having a “GIANT VOICE long into the future” and that “They will not be disrespected or treated unfairly in any way, shape or form!!!” is being interpreted as further indication that President Trump does not plan to facilitate an “orderly transition” and instead that he plans to continue to support, empower, and shield those who believe he won the election.

Plans for future armed protests have already begun proliferating on and off-Twitter, including a proposed secondary attack on the US Capitol and state capitol buildings on January 17, 2021.

As such, our determination is that the two Tweets above are likely to inspire others to replicate the violent acts that took place on January 6, 2021, and that there are multiple indicators that they are being received and understood as encouragement to do so.

@Twitter
Twitter Inc.

‎@Twitter‎ verified

Your official source for what’s happening.

https://blog.twitter.com/en_us/topics/company/2020/suspension.html

If that had been written as a parody it would have been unconvincing.

But its real.

Of course Trump announced that his own platform will be rolled out shortly.

But Google took a more serious step. It won’t distribute apps for other platforms unless they meet its requirements for enforcing “better moderation”. (In Australia they would have said “safety”).

Since they have a near monopoly with semi-locked phones it could actually take a few days of email forwarding for most people who care to learn how to download and install apps from other sources such as those listed here:

https://forum.f-droid.org/t/known-repositories/721

The next logical step would be to suppress access to material that “glorifies violence” by preventing normal URLs from working through the normal DNS.

That could take weeks rather than days for people to learn how to configure access to alternate DNS services for the “dark web”.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_DNS_root

It would be more significant by assisting NSA et al to keep closer tab on that smaller subset of people using the “dark web”.

Further escalation would involve actually shutting down server access at high bandwidth colocation sites.

So far they have not even been able to shutdown “Library Genesis” and “Sci-Hub” on the public DNS:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Library_Genesis
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sci-Hub
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5832410/#

The resilience of the networks behind those sites was massively hardened during the explosion of scientific collaboration bypassing commercial publishers resulting from covid-19.

Now of course Google, NSA et al are thoroughly aware of and indeed contributors to all of that.

It would certainly be possible to shut everything down in an emergency. What’s missing is the ability to just make peoople disappear. That is far simpler, quicker and more effective. No actual fascist regime tries to impose such breathtaking levels of censorship as that being announced without being able to rely on just locking people up.

Meanwhile the main effect is just to drive people into narrower circles that can be more easily monitored – eg if they end up imagining that the Tor encrypted networks funded by the US Navy are some sort of way to avoid US government surveillance.

But the side effect is far more important.

Raising the general level of paranoia is certainly “likely to inspire others to replicate the violent acts that took place on January 6, 2021”.

Suppressing that is likely to inspire some actual “domestic terrorism”.

Is that the aim?

Possibly for some. But my guess is the corporate liberals have just lost the plot.

Some Republicans really are stupid enough to imagine they could survive the primaries in two years by prohibiting Trump from running for public office.

If just 17 GOP Senators join the Democrats in impeaching Trump in order to impose that penalty, we would be in quite an extraordinary situation. Not worth analysing unless it actually happens. I have no way to guess whether there are that many who are that desperate and stupid.

But it is certainly plausible that there will be enough Democrats to start the impeachment process. They already did “the Russia thing” and they already impeached Trump once. What harm would they see in helping to intensify the fight that Trump has already unleashed in the opposing party?

So everything possible is being done to increase the relevance, support and enthusiasm of a large mass based right wing party with both a substantial Congressional representation and a militant extra-Parliamentary wing.

Moreover the complete desertion of basic democratic principles by Trump’s opponents forces others to unite with Trumpists on the simple issue of whether we want to be told what we are allowed to think and say by corproate liberals (who Trump calls the “radical socialist, Marxist left”).

I honestly cannot guess what the people at Twitter who signed themselves “Your official source for what’s happening” think will now happen.

My guess is it will be a lot easier to get along with the Trumpists in a united front than with that lot.

See also my comments of January 4 and 9:
https://c21stleft.com/2020/12/18/notes-on-trump-59-biden-joins-the-trump-campaign/#comment-4322
https://c21stleft.com/2020/12/18/notes-on-trump-59-biden-joins-the-trump-campaign/#comment-4332

108 thoughts on “Notes on Trump 61 Splodey Heads Splode”

  2. Amazon Web Services joining in means Big Tech has now gone pretty much as far as it can go.

    Smaller Internet Service Providers can still function as “common carrier” overlays to the same telecommunications networks the Internet relies on. Suppressing that requires changes to legislation.

    But they have now fully crossed the Rubicon as far as their intentions and aspirations are concerned. Presumably the incoming government has similar attitudes and legislation will follow.

    Costs of using small ISPs instead of the major providers are already significantly higher and possibly prohibitive as replacements for video services like Youtube that do need high bandwidth at colocation sites.

    Free speech of course only needs very low bandwidth. Adequately achieved with wax stencils in the 60s and later with simple modems and 16 bit computers over the Plain Ordinary Telephone Service long before the internet.

    Basically it isn’t possible to eliminate free speech by purely communications regulations in a population equipped with far more powerful smartphones and computers built into TV sets. That does require locking people up.

    There may be a slightly longer delay before the main opposition in the USA reorganizes its communications channels. That could assist some splintering and a greater prominence to the more extreme fringes. Perhaps that’s the aim.

    But without large scale repression this stuff simply cannot work and can only result in that large right wing party becoming stronger and better organized.

    My guess is still that they have just “lost the plot”.

    But its very a good thing that a lot of preparations were made by developers of Free and Open Source software to be able to deal with this sort of situation long ago.

    BTW compared with wax stencils and simple modems the bandwidth of a truckload of magnetic tape was cited as vastly greater. Only the delay is longer.

    Relaying texts (and even audio and video) via cheap flash drives can travel faster than leaflets ever did and with vastly more bandwidth than the world’s entire communications networks a few decades ago.

    Like

    Reply

  3. Wow! Here’s Arnie Scwarzenegger declaring war on Trumpists, compared with Nazis, complete with background heart tugging violin music, a flourish of Conan the Barbarian’s well tempered steel sword and a final pledge of allegiance to President elect Biden. 22M views so far:

    So the GOP is certainly going to fight back with some vigour.

    In other news actual trial of imminent impeachment looks likely to be held up in the House after being rushed through this week – to avoid providing an excuse for the Senate not having time to confirm the Biden administration’s nomination of cabinet level officials.

    Wise move just in case SCOTUS has not been adequately intimidated. President Pelosi would need a next in line if, despite all the screaming, it turned out the election had not been lawful and there was a vacancy for both President and Vice President that resulted in Pelosi being sworn in with no way to get nomination of a replacement Vice-President through the current Senate.

    Rather an “abundance of caution” though, since even if SCOTUS was determined to act vigorously it would not do so before the Georgia Senate replacements had been certified and sworn in and there are enough Republican Senators willing to ensure a line of succession for a President Pelosi.

    Could well be unrelated. Makes good sense to delay things for many other reasons.

    But given the sheer extremism of what’s going on now I would expect those involved that actually understand what they are doing to be very nervous indeed and taking lots of precautions.

    Like

    Reply

  5. I wrote some thoughts on my blog:
    1) Glenn Greenwald identifies main problem as the big tech 4 monopoly power, provides 3 telling recent examples
    2) Rudy Giuliani’s take on the Jan 6 demo is very interesting, he says the main rally was peaceful and a separate violent rally was planned by antifa. He does present some evidence for this assertion. His YouTube video has been taken down so he has republished it an antifa (I tried to post the direct link here 3 times but the moderation notice didn’t come up so if you want to watch go through my blog)
    http://billkerr2.blogspot.com/2021/01/the-real-political-problem-in-america.html

    Like

    Reply

    • Greenwald’s focus on Big Tech monopoly is tactically dangerous. Too easily confused with exactly what the liberals are advocating.

      The liberal campaign is for government regulation of social media. Ultimately that will be no more effective in a modern society than regulation by Big Tech but they explicitly justify it in terms of “unregulated Big Tech”.

      Arguably Big Tech is trying to reduce the impact on them of measures they can reasonably expect the next administration to take.

      https://www.politico.com/news/2021/01/08/capitol-riot-democrats-social-media-456325

      Lot of people jumping out of the woodwork to say that we can’t have Big Tech doing the “moderation” and it should instead be done according to government regulations (vastly extended version of the various “Anti-Discrimination” measures against “hate speech” redefined as “offensive” speech).

      Greenwald’s main point is about liberals actively demanding suppression of opposing views.

      He’s experienced it and the sixties movement certainly experienced it on a large scale.

      Its quite effective. Most people have no idea that the Vietnam war was started and escalated by liberals. Nor that there ever was a radical left explicitly hostile to liberals.

      Better expression of what Greenwald ought to more consistently say about Big Tech is here:

      Glenn Greenwald (@ggreenwald) Tweeted:
      Having elected officials with power over tech companies direct those companies to censor those with different ideologies is despotic: a merger of state and corporate/monopolistic power.

      But the 9/11 framework is in play: if you dissent from any of this, you’re pro-Terrorist.

      Its not clear to me what is happening yet.

      But I don’t see suppression of opposing views working without being able to arbitrarily lock people up on a large scale and I currently don’t see that on the immediate horizon.

      As explained in my article and other comments it is dramatically easier to spread ideas now than it was when radio, TV and newspaper networks had a MUCH tighter grip than Big Tech does now. (The domination by drivel in “social media” reflects the low level of vastly larger numbers that now have access to the means of communication and are still learning how to think and debate).

      My impression is that the liberals have just become more deranged than usual.

      Trump has gone out of his way to make their heads explode for the last four years and he has been quite good at it.

      Its hard to tell whether insisting that the President of the USA just incited an armed insurrection to overthrow the democratically elected government is qualitatively different from the years they spent on him being a Kremlin stooge.

      Part of their derangement seems to be real fear. They know a large proportion of US voters don’t think Biden was legitimately elected and it would indeed be odd if that does not have serious consequences.

      Greenwald’s tweets are somewhat confusing:

      Glenn Greenwald (@ggreenwald) Tweeted:
      That these Silicon Valley monopolies are grave menaces to political freedom & economic well-being is *not* a right-wing view.

      The most comprehensive report warning of these dangers was issued 3 months ago by a Democratic House Sub-Committee. Read this:

      https://t.co/28O8cutqKs https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/1348618688883290114?s=20

      Why on earth does he think a “Democratic Houses Sub-Committee” report would *not* be a right-wing view?

      I haven’t read it. But it would be more consistent with the position I hope he is moving towards if he was not adopting the usual conception of left and right in US politics. If he has read it and does agree with their proposals he could explain why without citing them as not being right-wing.

      As for Rudy Guliani, I watched the whole video:

      https://rumble.com/vcmgnr-what-really-happened-on-january-6th-rudy-giuliani-ep.-101.html

      Two entirely separate themes that he deliberately mixes together (along with ads for scams like gold coins and monthly fees to protect household titles from being stolen).

      1. That the media unanimously chimed in to blame Trump despite the obvious fact that a riot was not in Trump’s interests or consistent with the nature of his campaign and the sort of people at his rally.

      I would go further to assume it is a safe bet that somebody decided it would be a good thing if the Capitol police got overwhelmed and were without reinforcements as it would very naturally be blamed on Trump (with or without any prior coordination of the blaming since that would be the spontaneous reaction of the media without any need to coordinate it).
      The people in charge of Capitol Police that were promptly sacked certainly deserved to be sacked. As to who else was involved in refusing DoD and FBI offers of assistance in view of the open planning for riots by far right groups on social media, that may or may not eventually become clear.

      2. That the rioters were plants from antifa. No evidence for that whatever. Ridiculous for Rudy to pretend that:

      a) There is no far right fringe of militia types keen on violence that is keen to attach itself to and recruit from the right wing milieu provided by the Trump campaign and would not be likely to try to organize a riot at such a march on the Capitol.

      b) That there would not be sufficient numbers of more typical Trump supporters militant enough in support of “Stop the Steal” to be glad to push past the police and demonstrate enthusiastically inside the Capitol building if that happened to become feasible without actually having to fight the police themselves.

      Ashli Babbit getting shot by police inside the House chamber while part of the group at the door would be an example.

      Lots of the people who were filmed wandering through the building (keeping within the red ropes) taking selfies of themselves would have just been enthusiastic Trump supporters.

      A more rational point would have been that the media blamed Trump for not denouncing them when he told everyone that marched on the Capitol to “go home in peace” and the media pretended that he was only telling them that he “loved” them rather than also telling them to go home.

      Not denouncing his supporters is typical Trump. Rudy pretending otherwise is typical Rudy.

      The fact that people breaking the windows were immediately denounced as “antifa” and restrained by some in the crowd who were opposed to that is not evidence that they were antifa plants at all. It merely reflects the fact that those Trump supporters opposing and restraining them had the same assumptions as Rudy has that it would be bad for Trump and “therefore” done by his “left” opponents rather than by his “far right” fringe.

      The media not mentioning the Trump supporters restraining violence adds nothing much to item 1.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

      • arthur
        “Its not clear to me what is happening yet.

        But I don’t see suppression of opposing views working without being able to arbitrarily lock people up on a large scale and I currently don’t see that on the immediate horizon”

        My answer to that question is that the Democrats and their allies are terrified of Trump. They have thrown Big Lie after Big Lie at him for 4 years and he remained popular despite all that. Why did he remain popular? Because Democrat policies and outlooks from Bill Clinton (tough on crime, free trade agreements, cuts to welfare) to Obama (bailing out Wall Street) gave the traditional (industrial) working class no where else to go. The general economic situation has been increased wealth to the 1% or 0.1% and increased insecurity to the 99% (the precariat). Trump was going against (probably) irreversible historical trends (free trade, build the Wall to stop immigrants, decline of industrial jobs) but his core messages appealed to those who were doing backwards. The Democrats don’t seem to have any policies to help the precariat and seem to be so out of touch that they have stopped trying to even understand them. I saw an amazing video in a Matt Taibbi article where Joe Biden was calling on coal miners who had lost their job to retrain in computer programming. To me this revealed his mindset about what is important (elite skills) and his hopelessness about what to do about that huge section of the American population who don’t have those skills. Democrat royalty – the Clintons, Obamas, Pelosi’s etc – appear to have an unshakeable grip of incompetence about what to do with half the population. They ran an incredibly weak candidate and for all we know may have had to fabricate the election to win.

        So, given that background and their acute fear that Trump will defeat them again in 2024 they are taking this opportunity (the Capitol riot gives them a chance) to further try to discredit Trump (another Big Lie that he was planning an insurrection) and a possibility (perhaps not all that realistic) of impeaching him so he can’t run then. In the short term at least for the latest Big Lie to stick much of the evidence to the contrary has to be taken down.

        Other related questions:
        Why wipe out Parler now? Now that the Democrats have full control Big Tech moves quickly to rectify their past neglect. In the past they had to keep the door half open to an ascendant Trump
        How will they change section 230? Don’t really know, haven’t thought it through enough yet.

        Like

      • I responded in detail to your two points. Instead of responding to that for a continued exchange of views you are drifting off into other thoughts on your mind in a similar manner to Steve. Watcing amazing videos and listening to two hour podcasts instead of reading and thinking is not conducive to coherent analysis and even paralyses simple debate. I am still open to debate and reading links with information but certainly won’t be following you down the podcasts rabbit hole. I watched the Rudy video because he is an important figure, not as a source of “credible” information and explained why he isn’t. Hopefully larger sections of the population will become able to participate in written debates rather than be “audiences”.

        Like

  6. Just listened to a great podcast from Megyn Kelly, Tech Censorship And Independent Media, with Glenn Greenwald and the CEOs of Parler and Substack (2 hrs). She begins with her own analysis, then interviews John Matze, Parler CEO, then the CEO of substack, Chris Best and finally Glenn Greenwald. I found out a lot about Parler (not setup to be a right wing feed). At the end, Glenn Greenwald gives his opinion that the current craziness is a vengeful outpouring, built up since 2016, of those forces who saw their rightful ownership of the Presidency snatched away from them. Am I asking you to listen to a podcast that goes for a whole 2 hours? Yes.

    reposting link here:
    https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/tech-censorship-independent-media-glenn-greenwald-ceos/id1532976305?i=1000505187244

    Like

    Reply

  7. The growing disparity of incomes dates back to the Reagan Revolutionhttps://eprints.lse.ac.uk/59386/1/blogs.lse.ac.uk-Rising_income_inequality_in_the_US_was_fuelled_by_Ronald_Reagans_attacks_on_union_strength_and_contin.pdf
    Lots of people think that Mueller was based on a big lie but “The Special Counsel indicted 34 people—seven U.S. nationals, 26 Russian nationals, and one Dutch national—and three Russian organizations. Two additional individuals were charged as a result of referrals to other FBI offices.[441]
    Charges were filed against Trump campaign members George Papadopoulos, Paul Manafort, Rick Gates, Michael Flynn, and Michael Cohen. Charges were also filed against bank account seller Richard Pinedo,[442] and lawyer Alex van der Zwaan as well as Paul Manafort associate Konstantin Kilimnik. Also indicted were Russia-based Internet Research Agency and related organizations and individuals directed by Yevgeny Prigozhin, and a group of Russian hackers referred to as Viktor Netyksho, ….”
    Lots of people think that Obama initiated TARP but
    “The Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) is a program of the United States government to purchase toxic assets and equity from financial institutions to strengthen its financial sector that was passed by Congress and signed into law by President George W. Bush on October 3, 2008.”
    Lots of people think that Trump is the jobs president buthttps://www.forbes.com/sites/chuckjones/2020/02/07/obamas-last-three-years-of-job-growth-all-beat-trumps-best-year/?sh=622ded2c6ba6
    Lots of people think that the first Trump impeachment was a big lie but the undisputed facts were that he threatened to withhold military aid from Ukraine unless the Ukrainian president agreed to dig up dirt on Biden. Using your elected position to advantage your domestic political fortunes like this is best described as Treason rather than a big lie.

    Like

    Reply

    • Actually the National Association of Manufacturers and others were among the earliest to claim “incitement to armed insurrection” even before that beame the “unanimous consent” of the media and “real America, corporate America”.

      The gloating about having and enforcing a near monopoly on corporate funding and support and organizing a purge of boardrooms etc this from Democrats and pseudoleft is somewhat premature. It confirms them as the main representatives of a minority ruling class now widely despised in the USA.

      It certainly won’t convince anybody that disputes the legitimacy of the Biden administration that all is well.

      The Trumpists declared open war on their opponents in the GOP and told them all to pick a side and choose wisely.

      Some are reluctant to do that, since obviously the split in their party will result in Democrats winning many seats currently held by Republicans and consolidate the Democrats as essentially a one party regime. Corporate America is spelling out to them that they have no choice.

      I don’t think they ever did have much choice. Most are going to fight Trump including a lot who pretended to support him.

      But I doubt that they are very good at it. Money makes a huge difference. But at the primaries in two years time and enthusiastic base that can actually mobilize people to get out the vote by personal connections will matter a lot more.

      So everything happening supports my analysis that the USA is now stuck with a large mass based right wing party that will have both a substantial Parliamentary representation and a militant extra-Parliamentary movement facing a weak, ineffectual and corrupt regime that attempts to rule by active suppression of opposing views.

      My guess is that the Democrat establishment will be strengthened against the pseudoleft wing of the Democrats both by cooption and by an influx from the losing side of the war in the GOP.

      When the pseudoleft peels away from the Democrats again it will remain thoroughly discredited by its basic hostility to working people and to democracy.

      I still see no signs of a revolutionay democratic left. But I cannot imagine that the current bewilderment will not grow into disgust, anger and organization among people who do support democracy and do oppose both the corporate liberals and their right wing opposition.

      Meanwhile until that fully develops, Trumps right wing mass party will be the main opposition in the USA with a government engaged in ineffectual suppression rather than having a program that could attract mass support.

      Like

      Reply

  9. Airbnb
    In a statement, Airbnb said it would “withhold support” from lawmakers who voted against election certification.
    Amazon
    In a statement, Amazon said that they will suspend their PAC contributions from those who voted against election certification.
    American Airlines
    According to Popular Information, American Airlines said it will take a “three month pause” on political giving.
    American Express
    In an internal memo, the CEO of American Express said that the company’s PAC will no longer support those who objected to the results of the election.
    AT&T
    According to Popular Information, AT&T, which has made the largest contributions to Republicans who voted against election certification, will suspend contributions.
    Bank of America
    Bank of America said that in the next election cycle, it will “review [its] decision making criteria” when it comes to making donations.
    Blackrock
    According to the Washington Post, Blackrock is stopping its political donations.
    Blue Cross Blue Shield Association
    Blue Cross Blue Shield Association has announced that it is suspending PAC contributions to lawmakers who voted to challenge the election results.
    Boeing
    Boston Scientific
    Boston Scientific has stated it will temporarily suspend its PAC contributions.
    BP
    BP says it will halt PAC contributions for six months.
    The US Chamber of Commerce
    According to the New York Times, the US Chamber of Commerce, which is the largest business lobbying group in the country, said that it will no longer contribute financially to those who objected to the certification of the election results.
    Charles Schwab
    Charles Schwab said it will stop its PAC donations for the rest of 2021.
    Citibank
    According to an internal memo obtained by Popular Information, Citibank said it will suspend its PAC contributions for three months.
    CME Group
    In a statement, CME Group said that they will suspend all of their PAC contributions for “the foreseeable future.”
    Coca-Cola
    Coca-Cola announced it will suspend its political contributions, but will donate to President-elect Joe Biden’s inaugural committee. It also condemned the violence.
    Comcast
    In a statement, Comcast said that it will suspend contributions to those who voted against the certification of the election results.
    Commerce Bancshares
    Commerce Bancshares said in a statement that it is suspending “all support for officials who have impeded the peaceful transfer of power.”
    ConocoPhillips
    The gas company ConocoPhillips said it is halting its donations and reviewing its giving practices.
    Deloitte
    Deloitte has announced that it will suspend its political contributions.
    Deutsche Bank
    Deutsche Bank, to whom Trump currently owes over $300 million, has stated it will no longer do business with the president going forward. It also will refrain from doing business with those who voted against the certification of the election results.
    Dow Chemical Company
    Dow Chemical Company is suspending its corporate and employee PAC contributions for one election cycle.
    Ernst & Young
    In a statement to Popular Information, Ernst & Young that they are immediately suspending PAC giving.
    ExxonMobil
    ExxonMobil, the second-largest contributor to senators who voted against election certification, said it is reviewing its PAC contributions.
    Facebook
    Facebook told Popular Information that it will pause its PAC donations for “at least the current quarter.”
    Ford Motor Company
    Ford Motor Company is suspending its employee political action committee, due to the 2020 presidential election and the insurrection at Capitol Hill.
    General Motors
    General Motors released a statement saying that its “PAC contributions will be evaluated to ensure candidates align with our core values.”
    Google
    According to the New York Times, Google will suspend ads about “candidates, the election or its outcome, the upcoming presidential inauguration, the impeachment process, the Capitol riots, or planned protests about any of these subjects.” This is to go into effect on January 14th, and last until at least January 21st.
    Goldman Sachs
    In a statement to the New York Times, Goldman Sachs said it plans to stop all political donations.
    H&R Block
    In a statement, H&R Block said it is halting its PAC donations.
    Hallmark
    Hallmark is requesting refunds from Sens. Josh Hawley (R-MO) and Roger Marshall (R-KS) to return their PAC contributions, in light of their votes against election certification.
    Hilton
    Hilton has announced that it will suspend its PAC contributions indefinitely.
    Intel
    According to the Wall Street Journal, Intel will be suspending donations to those who objected to election certification.
    JPMorgan Chase
    JPMorgan Chase said that it will pause PAC contributions for six months.
    KPMG
    In a statement to Vox, KPMG said that they are “imposing a moratorium on contributions” to members of Congress who did not support election certification, and will re-evaluate their PAC giving.
    Lehigh University
    Lehigh University has stripped Trump of his honorary degree, which was awarded in 1988.
    Marriott
    As first reported by Popular Information, Marriott said it is no longer donating to members who voted against election certification.
    Mastercard
    In an internal announcement obtained by Popular Information, Mastercard said that it has suspended PAC contributions to members who voted against the certification of the election.
    McDonald’s
    In an internal memo reported on by Business Insider, the CEO of McDonald’s condemned the insurrection at the Capitol, stating that it was “an attack on all those things that people cherish and associate with America. That includes McDonald’s.”
    Microsoft
    Microsoft told Popular Information that until it reviews the events at the Capitol, it will not be making political contributions.
    Middlebury College
    Middlebury College is considering revoking Trump attorney Rudy Giuliani’s honorary degree, which was awarded in 2005, on account of his role in “fomenting the violent uprising against our nation’s Capitol building.”
    Morgan Stanley
    According to Business Insider, Morgan Stanley will suspend all PAC donations to those who voted against certifying the results of the election.
    Nike
    In a statement, Nike said that they will suspend PAC contributions to those who voted against the certification of the election results.
    Northrop Grumman
    In a statement to Defense News, Northrop Grumman said they are pausing their PAC contributions.
    PGA of America
    PGA of America has announced that it will no longer host the 2022 PGA Championship at Trump National Golf Club. The Trump Organization says this is a breach of contract.
    PricewaterhouseCoopers
    In a statement to Popular Information, PricewaterhouseCoopers said that they will suspend contributions to those who voted against election certification.
    Shopify
    Shopify has closed two online stores tied to Trump’s organization and his campaign.
    Signature Bank
    Signature has said it is closing President Trump’s personal accounts with the bank, and has called for him to resign in the wake of the events of the Capitol.
    Simon & Schuster
    GoDaddy
    YOUR DREAM’S DONE WAITING.
    Find everything you need to bring your idea online at GoDaddy. This is T…
    AdGoDaddyView Site
    Simon & Schuster has dropped Sen. Hawley’s book deal.
    Stripe
    Stripe said it will stop processing online payments for Trump’s campaign website, although the Wall Street Journal reports that Stripe is still processing payments through third parties.
    UnitedHealth Group
    According to Popular Information, UnitedHealth Group said it will pause its donations “to federal candidates.”
    Verizon
    In a statement to Reuters, Verizon said it will suspend contributions to those who objected to election certification.
    Visa
    In a statement to Popular Information, Visa announced that it will temporarily suspend all its political donations.
    Wagner College
    Wagner College has stripped Trump of his honorary degree, which was awarded in 2004.
    Walmart
    In a statement to Axios, Walmart said that they will indefinitely suspend PAC contributions to those who voted against election certification.
    The Walt Disney Company
    In a statement to Axios, Disney said that they will pause their political contributions in 2021.
    Zillow
    In a statement to Vox, Zillow said that they will be withhold their PAC support from those who objected to the certification of the election results.

    Like

    Reply

  10. hi arthur,
    I thought you made some good points in response to the Rudy Giuliani video about the Capitol Building riot. Part of my reason for delaying is fog of war. What happened will emerge more clearly over time as rioters are charged and it goes through the Court. Their backgrounds and political affiliations will be noted.

    But the logical points you make are not the same as evidence. From your knowledge of Trump supporters and what happens at demonstrations you make inferences that some of them (the evidence of “antifa” chanting when someone was trying to break a window would indicate a minority) would have wanted a violent protest. I agree. It’s also true that for some unknown reason Trump didn’t take sufficient measures to stop that happening, since he knows it would be bad for his cause. That part I can’t figure out but it’s not my problem. Everyone makes mistakes.

    Also as an experienced demonstrator you are aware of provocateurs so in the midst of the valid points you do make I think there is also a mistake when you say, “That the rioters were plants from antifa. No evidence for that whatever.” Whether or not antifa strictly speaking, there is evidence emerging now that anti Trump people were there playing the role of provocateurs. What percentage of those provocateurs played a leading role in initiating the violence? Fog of war, I don’t know. Was Giuliani misleading? Yes, but in a sense he was technically correct, given that he dissociates those who used violence as not wanted by the Trump team.

    Here’s the evidence I refer to:

    long twitter thread, I refer to items 6,7,8,9,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23

    Just a few half baked thoughts from my rabbit hole 😉

    Like

    Reply

    • Credible eyewitness account from Jan 6:I saw provocateurs at the Capital riot on Jan 6
      Summary: Police acted very strangely tear gassing a crowd who supported them; well organised provocateurs (political persuasion not known) led the attack.

      This account seems to me to be consistent with Giuliani’s.

      Like

      Reply

      • Link broken. Always just paste URL on a separate line. Don’t try to use markup.

        Without waiting for the link:

        Well organised provocateurs is entirely consistent with far right fringe groups whos political persuasion is well known. Giulani claiming they were antifa is entirely consistent with Giuliani.

        Like

    • Yes, there’s “fog of war”. But it was a public event with large numbers of participants. Pipe bombs at the RNC and DNC offices could be from anybody but there is no way that either the large crowd that marched from Trump rally to protest militantly at the Capitol or the much smaller groups that broke through police lines or the others that followed them in can plausibly be blamed on provocateurs hostile to the Trump supporters (as opposed to far right fringes hoping to recruit from them).

      Presence of a few nutters is not evidence.

      I did read the whole twitter thread and also downloaded the FBI affidavit for arrest warrant on one of the nutter provocateurs.

      Did not watch the video linked in that affidavit as it required registration:

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PfiS8MsfSF4&bpctr=1610480291

      But read some of the comments about it.

      I don’t think spending the time on this “fog of war” stuff was worthwhile. Unravelling the details cannot alter the obvious.

      It doesns’t require need unravelling details to answer your question:

      “It’s also true that for some unknown reason Trump didn’t take sufficient measures to stop that happening, since he knows it would be bad for his cause. That part I can’t figure out but it’s not my problem. Everyone makes mistakes.”

      1. Trump had no reason to expect that it would be POSSIBLE for the crowd he asked to march on the Capitol to break in.

      2. He did want them fired up and angry yelling and threatening and he did not want to denounce his supporters who did just what he asked for having also gone in and done that inside the building after the police lines collapsed, let alone denouncing them for going in and staying within the red ropes.

      3. I wouldn’t call it a mistake to not consider the possibility that the police would be overwhelmed. Those responsible (both the Democrats that planned it and the far right fringe that did it) may have thought it was a smart move but there is no reason Trump or his advisors should have expected it. The Capitol Police are under a board that was chaired by Sergeant-at-arms of the House who worked under, and was then sacked by, Speaker of the House, Pelosi. Presumably investigations are underway as to why somebody in Whitehouse was not informed by somebody in DoD or FBI that Capitol police had refused offers of reinforcements based on intelligence about open planning for riots and/or why they did not pass it on to Trump campaign. But nobody serious would be investigating whether it really was “antifa”.

      4. If Trump’s rally organisers had wanted to avoid the possibility of a very rowdy demonstration outside the Capitol with some people making lots of trouble they would have deployed lots of marshals. They have plenty of experience. They plainly did want a rowdy and militant demonstration by people fired up and angry. (“Who among us has not…”). Whether that would be bad for his cause is a matter of opinion, but I don’t see anything in the situation or Trump’s attitudes that would make me assume he would see it as bad for his cause.

      5. Actually breaking in would obviously be bad for his cause as the “party of law and order”. He does seem to have made the mistake of not reacting fast enough once that happened.

      6. Merely telling his supporters to “go home in peace” was an inadequate response to what was actually occurring at the time he said it. How much he knew by then is unclear. His later statements were along the same lines as Pence but came too late.

      7. The media and Democrat narrative about Trump inciting an armed insurrection to overturn the elections by storming the Capitol is so utterly bizarre that’s I still haven’t figured out what they expect or intend. I’m not surprised it took Trump some time to start responding to it. Like WTF?

      8. I doubt that a smoother and quicker response would make much difference. I don’t see the raving going down well among his supporters or helping his opponents in the GOP much. He had already declared open war on them first.

      9. Some polls taken immediately afterwards indicate 18% of Republicans and 3% of Democrats supported the protest at the Capitol.

      https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/most-americans-blame-trump-for-capitol-attack-but-are-split-on-his-removal

      10. The 80% of Republicans who (emphatically) did not support it are likely to find Trump’s belated denunciation of the violence in the same terms as Pence quite sufficient and not be at all sympathetic to GOP representatives that join Democrats in pretending Trump incited an armed insurrection to overturn election results.

      11. Current Rasmussen poll for 15 Jan still has Trump on 48% approval v 52% disapproval among likely voters.
      https://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/trump_administration/trump_approval_index_history

      Oddly same day and same source (polled 12-14 Jan) has 50% supporting removal from office!

      I don’t think the fog will clear for a while.

      Like

      Reply

      • Link was well worth reading. Does seem a credible account. I would think that because it is entirely consistent with what I said about far right fringe groups that were known to have been OPENLY PLANNING a riot that the Capitol Police refused to accept offers of reinforcements for from both DoD (National Guard) and FBI. Also describes natural reaction of some in the main crowd as hostile to police attacks on them, supportive of stronger protest against Capitol and confused about what’s going on and orders to not retreat etc.

        Trump has plenty of supporters among law enforcement. I would expect that narrative to spread widely and be combined with arrests of far right militia elements. If that ever gets combined with proving who prevented Capitol police from functioning and why (which would be much harder) it would be dynamite regardless of the success of media suppression.

        Certainly most Trump supporters will accept that account. I doubt that many will buy Giuliani’s or that he will persist with it.

        Meanwhile we just have my original description of a Reichstagbrand Season 2, the comedy version (not even an actual fire and banning twittering instead of locking up the opposition).

        Like

  11. Predictions: Trump is gone. He has zero corporate support (maybe my pillow guy will hang around). His personal finances are a mess, banks who would roll over debt will now want payment. Clearly he owes back taxes he was given a large tax write off when the Casinos went under but he emerged still owning part of the Casinos. My understanding is that he could emerge from bankruptcy with part of the Casinos or the tax write off but not both. Plus there are lots of other legal troubles ahead. Event organisers like the PGA will no longer hold events at his courses.
    Trump will not want to lead his rump of the party, no money and a smaller base a guaranteed loser, theres no upside for him there unless as Michael Cohen argues he will just use it as a money spinner. Collect money from his base and pay himself for the “expenses”. Speaking of expenses what are the odds that he will stiff Giuliani for his $20K per day fee?
    The Republicans will have to re invent themselves for too long they have stepped to the right. They have embraced every stupid idea that appears on FOX. From Xenophobia to collecting more tax by cutting tax. It shouldnt be to hard for the party of free market capitalism to reinvent themselves in the country of free market capitalism. Purge a few lunatics and start again.
    The Democrats have an easy run and I expect Joe to be a popular president. Stimulate the economy with $2 trillion send everyone a $2000 cheque and he is half way there. Do some sensible stuff about the pandemic like speeding up the vaccine roll out and for the rest he just has to be a “normal” president. Historically both the employment rate and the stock market do better under Democrat presidents go figure.

    Like

    Reply

    • Prediction. Pseudoleftists are stupid enough to imagine that bankrupting Trump will enable GOP to “purge a few lunatics and start again”. After all they are wildly enthusiastic about censorship and went all the way about “the Russia thing”, so why not?

      Like

      Reply

      • Your post makes no sense. Trump wont go bankrupt because us pseudos imagine it. Trump will go bankrupt because 1 he will probably lose his fight with the IRS over his taxes. 2 He will go bankrupt because he runs the Trump organisation on debt and the debt seems to be catching up with him. 3 He needs according to his former fixer an income steam and with the loss of customers to his hotels and golf courses that income stream is drying up. Plus he has law suits with the Manhattan District attorney, the New York State AG, the Maryland AG, the Washington DC AG, Jean Carroll’s case against him for rape, Summer Zervos’ case for deformation and Mary Trump’s case for fraud.
        Russia did interfere with the 2016 election the US government held an inquiry into it and indicted 34 people.
        As to censorship well Im totally in favor of free speech but free speech does not exist. We live in a society where the tools of mass communication are in private hands and the owners have the total right to allow or disallow people to use those tools plus there are laws that restrict free speech such as the deformation and slander laws. Free speech has never existed theres always a struggle over it. You get those Republican loons speaking on national TV only to say that they are being censored. FFS your on national TV its the definition of not being censored.
        Finally the GOP does have to exit a few loons, they have congress people who believe in Q.
        They had a state representative who filmed himself storming the Capitol building.
        Fuck they stood Sara Palin for vice president and couldnt stop Trump wrecking their party.
        For years they have presented nonsense as policy drawn to the right by the tea party, Fox news, Q and the NRA always with the mantra that government is bad, government is the problem, only clinging to office because the electoral system is undemocratic as the founding fathers meant it to be. (founding fathers representing slave holders)

        Like

      • Thanks for sharing what runs through your head as you watch the media insisting that Trump incited an armed insurrection to overturn the US elections. No doubt many people do think (or block themselves from thinking) that way. I have no more idea how to respond to it than Bill Maher does to Trumpists.

        The Bill Maher video was also interesting. I watched the whole 5′ or so because that was reasonably short, despite the startup being just the usual sneering at deplorables to canned laughter. I guess he had to start that way to confirm to his audience that he was still one of them despite going on to make a serious point about the fact that nearly half the US voters are not going to just go away and the Democrats aren’t doing anything for them any more than Trump was.

        BTW here’s another Trumpist State representative who responded “I’ll fight” to Trump’s declaration of open war on his opponents in the GOP and spoke at Trump’s rally on Jan 6:

        https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/georgia-rep-vernon-jones-democrat-republican

        Like

  14. Small point you have now repeatedly got the concept of canned laughter wrong. Is this intentional or are you unaware that Maher has live audience in that clip?
    Clearly Trump has been trying to over turn the election result by initiating over 60 legal actions, like pressuring Republican election officials to “find” more votes, like inviting Republican state officials to the White house, by encouraging states not to certify the results and by pressuring Pence to reject the electoral college votes that favored Biden.
    He made one last attempt to over turn the results in that he encouraged a mob lead by far right militias like the Oath Keepers and groups like the proud boys to go to the Capitol and pressure legislators to reject the electoral college vote. When ever someone starts a beer hall putsch you dont know how it will end you just do your best and roll the dice.
    Trump did his best, it was widely known that the militia groups intended to storm the building, last year they had a practice run in Michigan.
    In the lead up to Jan 6
    “Discussions on multiple sites talked very graphically and explicitly about “war”, physically taking charge at the event, and killing politicians, including a request for opinions about which politician should be hung first (with a GIF of a noose).”
    When the crowd went in the chant was “Hang Mike Pence”
    So it was fairly obvious what the ultras were going to attempt, the question is did Trump incite.
    Well at the rally Trump said to the crowd that they should “fight like hell” Giuliani said that the crowd should engage in “trial by combat” and Donald Jr addressed the members of Congress and said “we are coming for you”
    It would be difficult to argue that this is not incitement but people do they say that it was just hyperbole or that the real nasties were Antifa infiltrators.
    In the end its a judgment call.
    My call is that Jan 6 was the culmination of a series of attempts to over throw an election on the basis that it was rigged. People can on the basis of zero evidence agree that it was rigged or people can agree that Trump is desperately attempting to cling to power. So desperate that he would tacitly rely on the efforts of fascistic elements within American society.

    Like

    Reply

    • 1. Unaware (and unconvinced). It sounded like canned laughter and I did not notice anything in the clip that suggested live audience.
      2. Trump has initiated legal actions which have reached SCOTUS with expedited relief refused so no hearings yet. Opponents seem very upset about going to court with a dispute.
      3. It is not possible for anyone to actually believe that a mob COULD have overturned the Electoral College vote. The unanimous chanting about this is actually like the “Russia thing” and adequately explains why so many people disgusted by deranged ranting from Trump’s opponents did vote for him despite the lack of much in the way of positive reasons to do so.
      4. If it wasn’t you I would assume you were writing a parody. It was certainly known to Capitol Police chiefs and they let it happen. It is obvious who stood to gain.
      5. Yes, and DoD and FBI gave warnings to Capitol police about the rantings from the very small numbers who “overwhelmed” a force of more than 2000 well armed police who simply weren’t there.
      6. The crowd of tens of thousands didn’t go in. Small numbers went in and mainly wandered around taking selfies. Somebody is supposed to have chanted “Hang Mike Pence”.
      7. It was obvious to Capitol Police that ultras would try something. It is equally obvious that somebody in command decided to let them. Nancy Pelosi has sacked the commanders who were responsible to her, not to Trump. Your conclusion from the media is that Trump incited it.
      8. Trump declared open war on the GOP at the rally and incited the very large crowd (hundreds of thousands) to fight like hell to primary his opponents, which they will do. Hours of video are available.
      9. Guiliani demanded an audit of voting machines and ballots and oddly said that if they had nothing to hide they would agree to that as “trial by combat”.
      10. Donald Jr did say “we are coming for you” and they are. They will get primaried.
      11. It is not a judgment call either about whether it was antifa (as claimed by Guliani) or by Trump. It is quite plain who is pretending there is a Reichstag Fire, and blaming it on their opposition, without even bothering to actually have a burnt building. Its comedy not tragedy since instead of locking up their opponents they are closing their twitter accounts.
      12. Your “call” is deranged. Take a deep breath. There will eventually be hearings as to whether the election was rigged. The hysteria against that is the main thing that is convincing so many millions of people that it actually was rigged. Pretending that demanding those hearings and “inciting” protests was LITERALLY an “armed insurrection to overturn the elections” is EXACTLY what the Democrat majority in the House of Representatives just did (together with two handfuls of Republicans about to get primariried). Such levels of derangement have not been seen from Trump but are in full view from aspirational fascists who think they can get force millions of people to shut up by screaming “insurrection” and calling in the troops.
      13. Like most of the clowns cheering on a shutdown of political opposition to the US government your support for this aspirational fascism is not accompanied by the actual willingness to kill people that would make it something other than laughable.

      Like

      Reply

  15. Bill Maher returned to live audience performances Sept 2020

    I think that you make a good point about the prime suspect in any crime being the person with the most to gain.
    You deflect the words at the rally as being in reference to elections 2 years away but what I think is most telling is the holding of the march. He must have had security briefings, he must have been told that para militaries were intending to storm the building he must have known about Michigan. He could have said thankyou for coming to the White House today but we are not marching to the Capitol.
    I will look up stuff about who was responsible for the lax security and see if I can find a Democrat conspiracy that Trump walked into. I agree that the obvious is not always the answer.
    https://www.dailydot.com/debug/hang-mike-pence-video/

    Like

    Reply

    • 1. Wow. I just sort of assumed that Bill Maher’s audience would have died by now. My bad.
      2. Thanks.
      3. If there were anything incriminating in the videotape of the rally it would have been all over the media. Forget it. If you cannot forget it then go comb through it at C-span and see if you can find something that thousands of heroic counter insurgency warriors failed to notice.
      4. How would anybody be able to persuade Trump’s rally organizers that it was POSSIBLE for well known keboard warriors proclaiming their plans on the internet to get past whatever preparations the Capitol Police thought necessary? The only way it has been possible to “persuade” large numbers of media consumers is by first rotting their minds with breathless Trump Derangement System about whether he would “refuse to leave office” and simultaneously shutting down replies to a PATENTLY ABSURD story. Trump’s rally was intended to march on the Capitol and it did so.
      5. You will easily find who was in charge of Capitol police and who immediately sacked them. The full story will take a while to dig out and cannot possibly be established by browsing. You already know who stood to gain. The rest is a matter of detail and evidence that will necessarily take time and remain contested with elaborate explanations of implausible other explanations from official inquiries.
      6. Your video link shows more than one person in the crowd (possibly up to a dozen) outside the building chanting “Hang Mike Pence” as people who had got in were leaving with police at the door supervising their exit. Rather more impressive evidence would be available about much larger numbers preferring to behead the President rather than hang his Vice President. It has as much to do with an “insurrection to overturn the elections” as sticking pins into voodoo dolls (which courts have ruled does not constitute attempted murder even in countries where belief in the potential efficacy of such an “attempt” is widespread).
      7. BTW here’s Giuliani on “trial by combat”:

      If you locate the longer version at C-span just after to confirm that he must REALLY have been inciting violence if only a bit more had been included, please link to the timestamp.

      Like

      Reply

  16. Merkel makes stand in favor of free speechhttps://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/11/germanys-merkel-hits-out-at-twitter-over-problematic-trump-ban.html

    Like

    Reply

  17. Where this beer belly putsch failed is in the fact that while some police may have sympathised with the rioters they didnt join in. This clearly irritated some of the rioter who spoke to the police in an attempt to get them to change sides. In any right wing coup it seems essential that the police or army go over. Trump didnt call the rioters to heal until it had clearly failed. (this is a huge sign of complicity)
    Democrats and Republicans may well have seen the riot as a way of discrediting Trump but just like the storming of the Michigan capitol building was a dry run so was this and the only thing that saved Mike Pence from a neck tie was that the police may have wavered but they didnt join in. Ultra right movements are more popular in the army and more again in the police than they are in the general population.
    The far right seem to be splintered into many groups but just as the KKK would never have anything to do with the US Nazi party they eventually saw that they were of like mind and started to cooperate.
    I think that Biden’s call for unity is a big mistake the neo fascists’ are a snake that should be trodden on.

    Like

    Reply

    • > Trump didnt call the rioters to heal until it had clearly failed. (this is a huge sign of complicity)

      What are you smoking, Steve? You say “it had clearly failed”. What had clearly failed? Trump’s attempt to seize power by insurrection? The rioters could have hanged Pence, kidnapped all the Democrats, even killed all the Democrats and they would be no where near seizing state power of the USA. The possibility of that occurring (seizing State power) was ZERO. If you really believe that Trump doesn’t understand that then IMHO you are seriously deluded.

      > Biden’s call for unity is a big mistake the neo fascists’ are a snake that should be trodden on

      Are you also believing that Biden believes in his call for unity? Or are you just saying he should of told a different lie? (that 70 million + Americans follow a neo fascist). He did keep repeating that lie.

      Like

      Reply

      • Understanding Steve might help to understand the delusional mentality that it is now quite widespread. My guess is that he cannot actually believe there was ANY POSSIBILITY that Trump was mounting a “putsch” that failed. But like others he has to bury that thought and not consciously think about it because of the resulting cognitive dissonance from loyalty to his tribe and the unavoidable conclusion that they are engaged in a currently more successful anti-democratic maneuver.

        Steve certainly IS “seriously deluded”. But it is a “mainstream” form of delusion. People’s religious beliefs are manifestly delusional but that cannot be dealt with as a mental health issue when they are “mainstream”. Sames goes for political delusions. They are far from uncommon.

        Like

  18. On Jan 17th Steve wrote:
    > As to censorship well Im totally in favor of free speech but free speech does not exist

    Given your lack of criticism of Trump’s free speech being shut down. Parler being deplatformed by Big Tech and the making up of lists of Trump supporters to be punished in some way I am having some difficulty in believing that you are “totally in favor of free speech”. Being in favour of free speech means attacking those who are restricting it and we have a new ruling class in the USA (Dems, Big Tech, Wall Street, Intelligence services) who have initiated further free speech restrictions in view of an alleged domestic terror threat. I haven’t heard you defending free speech at all, rather what I’m hearing is that you believe that the domestic terror threat is real and by implication, therefore, the above restrictions of free speech are justified.

    Like

    Reply

  19. What I was trying to point out is that free speech under capitalism doesnt exist. Take Twitter Im fully in favour of Tangerine Mussolini getting his Twitter account back but I know that Twitter being a private company has the total right to de platform anyone they want. They can draw up any rules that they want and interpret them any way they want. I spoke to my HR department today and they told me that I run the risk of losing my job for a facebook account that I run because it critisises the government and I work for the government. So Tangerine M lost his twitter account, is he now deprived of free speech? Hell no if he held a press conference every network would telecast it.
    He is pondering buying his own network or having a programme on a highly rated cable network like Fox or OAN. But despite his claim to victimhood I still agree that he should get his twitter account back on the basis that I support free speech even for a turd like Trump.

    Like

    Reply

  20. Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib (MI-13) led nine of her colleagues in sending a letter to Congressional leadership, including Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, urging that national security powers not be expanded in light of the attack on the U.S. Capitol that occurred two weeks ago, as such measures often lead to the erosion of Americans’ civil liberties.
    Press release
    https://tlaib.house.gov/media/press-releases/tlaib-leads-colleagues-urge-civil-liberties-be-protected-wake-capitol-attack
    Full text of letter

    Click to access NationalSecurityOpp.pdf

    Like

    Reply

    • Interesting development.I had the impression AOC was heading the other way. Seems to me a very large part of the current centrist Democrat hysteria is aimed at shouting louder than this pseudoleft wing to outflank them by pandering to their supporters. So it is very good that they are not getting sucked in. Would be better if they also started denouncing the fantasies about incirement to insurrection and opposing censorship but it is probably quite significant that their statement does not actually join in the near compulsory endorsement of that stuff but more accurately just describes it as far right violence.

      Like

      Reply

    • It is understandable that Snowdon and Greenwald might clutch at such speculation but studying the tea leaves of Tucker Carson is not much help in understanding a complex situation that is still unfolding. Lots of distracting rumurs and theories inevitable in a situation that is hard to understand.

      Like

      Reply

  22. Was Trump complicit in the putsch? Well he must have known that his supporters would try to take the Capitol building. He knows that his supporters had done exactly that in Michigan. What he didnt know was whether the Capitol police could be won over. Clearly a lot of rioters thought that they could be turned and a putsch hangs on the idea that the foot soldiers of the old regimen will at least stand aside.
    The argy barge starts at 1.10 with a struggle on steps. Trump says nothing
    1.40 The mayor orders a city wide curfew. Trump says nothing
    2.15 The west side of Capitol building is breached Trump says nothing
    2.22 Pence is escorted from the building
    2.24 Trump tweets criticism of Pence
    2.38 Trump tweets “stay peaceful”
    3.13 Trump tweets “remain peaceful”
    4.17 Trump urges supporters to go home
    So lets be clear about my delusional status The violence starts at 1.10 and it takes Trump over 3 hours to urge his supporters to go home. In that 3 hours the Capitol building has been over run a woman has been shot dead and an officer has been beaten so bad that he dies.
    We dont know what goes through Trumps head but we do know that he has close advisors urging him to declare martial law but to do that you would probably need a level of chaos that could only happen if the Capitol riots had gone better for the rioters. If the Capitol police had put up less resistance then those who had the foresight to bring zip tie hand cuffs might have snared some prisoners and who ever erected the gallows outside might have had some business and martial law could have been proclaimed to save the country.
    But on the other hand the whole thing was orchestrated by Nancy and Mitch in an effort to make Trump look bad and my delusional state prevents me from seeing this reality. That could be true just like my delusional state prevented me from declaring the election rigged on the flimsy basis that there was zero evidence.

    Like

    Reply

    • As described in Bill’s link to article by witness and confirmed in FBI affidavit there were organized groups that intended to organize a break-in:

      Affidavit for Proud Boys warrant
      https://www.justice.gov/opa/page/file/1357251/download

      Others joined in that, as one would expect
      https://www.justice.gov/opa/page/file/1357246/download

      Trump and pretty well everybody else in US politics would either have been present at the joint session of Congress or watching it on TV as the “argy bargy” with police started and crowd broke through outer perimeter.

      Congress continued to meet while there were clashes between police and protestors outside.

      The (purely posturing) dispute of the first of the battleground States, Arizona, was interrupted when rioters actually broke into the building.

      It is was certainly forseeable that there could be clashes between police and protestors outside the Capitol. Trump’s rally organisers took no precautions against that and it is not unreasonable to assume that Trump was pleased by it. He wanted an angry crowd denouncing a fraudulent election and he got one.

      Trump’s tweeters were still relayig his bizarre complaints about Pence not having unilaterally refused to accept the Arizona certified Electoral College votes instead of following the legislated procedures for each House to vote separately when Pence was taken into protective custody by his Secret Service escort.

      It was always utterly clear that the posturing for Congress to overturn the results was not capable of overturning them since both Houses would have to separately agree to reject the votes of any State and Democrats had a clear majority in the House of Representatives.

      Anyone who actually knows what they are talking about and claims the riot could have been intended to intimidate Congress into overturning the results is not “delusional” but unambiguously and deliberately lying. The actual groups that organised the rioters would have had wild fantasies they would be able to recruit more widely rather than getting crushed but so far the charges have been for illegal entry rather than any “insurrection” to overthrow the US government by storming the Capitol (to which the obvious defense would be “insanity”).

      Trump’s rally was certainly aimed at mobilizing opposition to his GOP opponents and pressuring them to join in his posturing (as most of them did in the House and very few did in the Senate). The pressure and quite overt “intimidation” was that they would be primaried if they did not

      It is utterly clear that the only people who expected the Capitol building to be entered were those who arranged for the police to be overwhelmed. (Not necessarily Nancy Pelosi herself but obviously people in those circles).

      There is zero evidence that Trump was any more expecting it than the members of both Houses were when they were interrupted.

      CONFIRMATION that he wasn’t is provided by his poorly worded initial tweets. He wasn’t going to denounce his supporters for a rowdy protest that he had encouraged. He did not want them involved in the riot and breakin and he did not want to be seen as “calling his dogs to heel” since they weren’t his dogs. So he told that his supporters that had marched on the Capitol from the rally at his request that he loved them, that they should respect the Capitol police and go home in peace.

      That was inadequate and damaging for Trump given what had actually occurred and is evidence that he had not yet grasped what had occurred. But in fact it was only 15′ or so after the first AP reports of the building having been breached when it was still not clear what was happening.

      It took him far too long to denounce what had actually occurred in the same terms that Pence did. Twitter duly censored that to give the story about Trump inciting an insurrection more time to take hold. It HAS taken hold among Democrat partisans, despite being PREPOSTEROUS which shows how utterly delusional they are.

      Here’s the AP timeline:

      2:47 p.m. After egging on protests, President Donald Trump tweeted to his supporters to “stay peaceful” as they violently clash with law enforcement and breached the Capitol building.

      “Please support our Capitol Police and Law Enforcement,” Trump tweeted, as tear gas was deployed in the locked-down Capitol. “They are truly on the side of our Country. Stay peaceful!”

      Trump at a rally earlier Wednesday encouraged his supporters to head to the Capitol. “We’re going to cheer on our brave senators and congressmen and women, and we’re probably not going to be cheering so much for some of them,” Trump said. ___

      2:45 p.m. Lawmakers are being evacuated from the U.S. Capitol after protesters breached security and entered the building. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and other senators were led out, escorted by staff and police on Wednesday afternoon. Members of the House were also being evacuated. Both chambers had been debating the certification of Joe Biden’s victory in the Electoral College. The skirmishes came shortly after President Donald Trump addressed thousands of his supporters, riling up the crowd with his baseless claims of election fraud. Protesters could be seen marching through the Capitol’s stately Statuary Hall shouting and waving Trump banners and American flags. Some House lawmakers tweeted they were sheltering in place in their offices. ___

      2:40 p.m. The mayor of Washington, D.C., has ordered a curfew in the nation’s capital beginning at 6 p.m. Wednesday after protestors seeking to overturn the election results stormed the U.S. Capitol building. Mayor Muriel Bowser issued the order as protestors supporting President Donald Trump breached the Capitol, where lawmakers were meeting to formally count the electors that will make Joe Biden president on Jan. 20. The order extends through 6 a.m. Thursday. The skirmishes came shortly after Trump addressed thousands of his supporters, riling up the crowd with his baseless claims of election fraud. ___

      2:30 p.m. Protesting supporters of President Donald Trump have breached the U.S. Capitol. There was confusion in the House chamber as the Capitol doors were locked and the debate over the electoral count was suspended. A representative from the Capitol police spoke from a lectern on the dais and told lawmakers to remain calm, and that more information would be available soon. House Rules Committee Chairman James McGovern of Massachusetts told the crowd that the House expected to go back into session soon. Meanwhile, members milled around the floor and looked at their phones. Reporters and others outside the chamber were told to go their seats inside and not leave. The skirmishes came just shortly after Trump addressed thousands of his supporters, riling up the crowd with his baseless claims of election fraud. ___

      2:20 p.m. The Senate has recessed its debate over an objection to the results of the Electoral College after protesters forced police to lock down the building. Reporters were told to stay in the Senate’s press gallery as the doors were locked. Protesters tore down metal barricades at the bottom of the Capitol’s steps and were met by officers in riot gear. Some tried to push past the officers who held shields and officers could be seen firing pepper spray into the crowd to keep them back. The skirmishes came just shortly after President Donald Trump addressed thousands of his supporters, riling up the crowd with his baseless claims of election fraud. ___

      2:20 p.m. Texas Sen. Ted Cruz says American “democracy is in crisis” with polls showing that large numbers of voters “believe the election that just occurred was rigged.” Cruz, a Republican, objected to the certification of election results in Arizona, saying the Senate has a responsibility to acknowledge the profound threat posed by widespread disbelief in the legitimacy of the election. He called for the creation of a commission to conduct a 10-day “emergency audit” to investigate any irregularities, citing a similar commission created after the 1876 presidential election. Cruz urged lawmakers not to “take the easy path, but instead act together″ and create a “credible and fair tribunal. Consider the claims, consider the facts, consider the evidence and make a conclusive determination whether and to what extent this election complied with the Constitution.’’ ___

      1:55 p.m. The U.S. Capitol Police are evacuating some congressional office buildings due to “police activity” as thousands gather outside the Capitol to protest the electoral vote. Police told congressional staff members they should evacuate the Cannon House Office Building and the building that houses the Library of Congress. It wasn’t immediately clear what specifically sparked the evacuation. A police spokeswoman did not immediately respond to calls and emails seeking comment. Thousands of people have descended on the U.S. Capitol as Congress is expected to vote to affirm Joe Biden’s 2020 presidential win. Videos posted online showed protesters fighting with U.S. Capitol Police officers as police fired pepper spray to keep them back.

      By Associated Press | January 6, 2021 at 8:57 PM EST – Updated January 6 at 11:20 PM

      Like

      Reply

  23. Essentially Steve’s fantasy about martial law is IDENTICAL to Qanon:

    “On encrypted message boards and digital apps, followers labeled Jan. 19 as “national popcorn day” in the hopes that they would have a front-row seat to the mass arrests of Antifa campaigners and, possibly, Trump imposing martial law in an effort to turn the election.”

    https://www.politico.com/news/2021/01/20/trump-qanon-inauguration-day-460926

    It is fascinating that the liberal fantasies that Qanon, Proud Boys etc represented “Trump’s base” has finally resulted in them actively promoting the most bizarrely insane of their rantings.

    Like

    Reply

  24. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/01/15/pillow-salesman-apparently-has-some-ideas-about-declaring-martial-law/
    https://www.huffingtonpost.com.au/entry/michael-flynn-martial-law-new-election_n_5fc7d3e6c5b6f3fe59724a45?ri18n=true
    Funny how Im delusional but Trump has advisers that are backing my delusion. You can be delusional about an attack from Mars but when the Martians turn up it is no longer delusional.
    Funny too how Trump makes innocuous tweets to his followers but when he asks them to go home he goes on TV. How many outside the building were watching TV at the time?

    Like

    Reply

  25. Yep, the language as well as the thought process is typical of conspiracy theorists. “Funny how…” it all fits together in their heads.

    This stuff has now moved from the lunatic fringe to the mainstream liberals. They really are committed now that everyone must unite for healing by declaring their faith that an armed insurrection to overthrow the US government has just been suppressed.

    Whether they believe it themselves is only marginally relevant. The political degeneration is complete and goes far beyond absurdities promoted by Trump (as opposed to Qanon and other fantasists whose nuttiness was once paraded to pretend it came from Trump and is now being echoed literally word for word by liberals as though it actually happened).

    I doubt that it will eventually be “revealed” that Trump himself was in fact a Martian but if it was, the believers will believe.

    Like

    Reply

  26. I guess the issue is, was this an attempt to overthrow the government and did Trump assist this attempt. Any definitive judgement on Trump’s role must be put on hold because you would have to know what he was thinking and we just don’t know.
    So first lets look at was this a serious attempt? The riot was attended by groups like the 3%ers, the Oath Keepers, the Proud Boys, QAnon, NSC-131 and the Boogaloo Bois. These groups definitely have the idea that they were there to change the government. I think that they would agree that one spark can start a prairie fire.
    Now to you and me it is absurd that a couple of hundred well coordinated nutcases could overturn the government but this is not the way they see it. These groups think that they sit on a powder keg of possibilities. This is the best shot at achieving their dreams that they have ever had. Anyone who wants to violently overthrow society must also accept that in building towards success failure must be integrated into the process. The Irish had the Easter uprising, the Nazi’s had the beer hall putsch the Bolsheviks had 1905.
    Now to Trump well he’s difficult to pin down as he dog whistles a lot, and puts out contradictory information and all Presidents are alert to the plausible deniability strategy.
    He did encourage Michigan to rise up. What does that mean? To the ultras it meant storm the Michigan Capitol building and plan to kidnap and kill the Governor of Michigan.
    In December he tweeted that people should come on Jan 6 because it will be wild. What does wild mean in this context? On the day he was a firebrand but of course he meant no harm that was all rhetoric about primaries 2 years away. really?
    So after the rally what did the most powerful man in the world do? He said that he was going to the Capitol building but then turned around and went into the White House reportedly to watch the fun unfold on TV and to ignore the many attempts to contact him as people desperately wanted the leader of this murderous mob to call them off or to order a higher level of security to be mobilised.
    But for hours he did nothing other than watch TV and tweet remain peaceful.
    Just a word since we opened up on this topic people have questioned what I am smoking and told me that I am delusional. I am prepared to debate and give way to a superior argument or a better interpretation of the facts but just like the election show me the evidence. Scott Adams may be unable to draw any uncomfortable conclusions because he exists in the fog of war but maybe hes just unable to draw any uncomfortable conclusions.

    Like

    Reply

    • Steve,
      You now seem to be leaving the door open for the possibility that you might be wrong. But you are changing the story from what Trump thought to what groups like the Proud Boys, Qanon etc. thought.
      You never responded to my initial assertion that the rioters could have killed Pence and all the Democrats and still be no where near seizing power. In all your comments you never mentioned the military, I thought my comment would have given you the hint of who ultimately determines who hold state power. Rather more important than time lines, tweets and TV watching.
      From my understanding Trump and the military did not see eye to eye on a few issues. eg. there was a report that the military lied to Trump about how many troops / special forces etc. were still in Afghanistan so he wouldn’t remove too many. Another report from Trump’s farewell speech that he was proud (I think he said proudest achievement) that he didn’t start any new wars.
      If Trump has spent a few seconds thinking he could organise an insurrection his thought process might have gone like this, “Will the military support me? Answer: No” That is why I said ZERO possibility.
      State power is politics 101 Steve, which is why I asked what you were smoking.
      Fraudulent election issue: I’ve thought all along it was a possibility since Biden was such a weak candidate and got more votes than anyone in history. My understanding is that the Supreme Court made a political decision to kick the can down the road. That is different from there not being evidence. I haven’t evaluated most of the evidence, but neither have those who are in a position to do so. ie. where is the comprehensive list of claims and rebuttals? We are now in a climate where to suggest there was fraud is not allowed, you will be cancelled. USA now has a cancel culture from below (Universities) and above (the new government). You don’t seem to have noticed. There is no proof at this point that there was enough fraud to change the result. Democrats could have supported the Ted Cruz group to have an quick audit to calm things down. As things stand now I’m far from sure there will be electoral reform which is needed to restore credibility of the process for Republicans and Independents. That creates an ongoing powder keg. When it blows up you can always blame Trump. Trump has gone but TDS is getting stronger.

      Like

      Reply

      • (Ignoring the background noise illustrating just how nutty mainstream liberals are getting. Speaks for itself. No comment needed).

        “Democrats could have supported the Ted Cruz group to have an quick audit to calm things down”. Senator Lindsey Graham gave a very clear response to this (after mentioning that he disagreed with the various court decisions but would accept them and explaining how spectacularly bad the precedent for Congress dealing with disputes about the Electoral College was – resulted in the end of Reconstruction and start of Jim Crow era). Apparently what was proposed was a commission appointed by the Speaker of the House, Majority Leader of the Senate and Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. Graham’s remark was that a commission appointed by Nancy Pelosi, Mitch McConnell and John Roberts wasn’t going to calm anybody down “it ain’t gonna work”.

        Ted Cruz was joining Trump in utterly bullshit posturing. If there ever is a thorough investigation it will be far more likely to convince more people the election was rigged whether or not the various issues were enough to swing the result. But lots are convinced simply because they have no more contact with Democrats than Democrats do with Trumpists and would consider it inherently illegetimate for an election to go that way EXACTLY AS DEMOCRATS DID. They will become more convinced the more the ranting continues.

        BTW the polls for numbers who said Trump was not legitimately elected (because of Russia etc) were marginally higher than the current numbers re Biden. Difference is the active suppression. Whereas Trump actively encouraged the Splodey Heads to Splode in order to discredit them, they are now so far gone they need no further prompting. I think the larger numbers then were just hysterically ranting like Steve here and could not even organize to take over the Democrat party. The large numbers of Trump voters now being told they are beyond the pale are not inclined to hysteria but are likely to “fight like hell” to kick their opponents out of the GOP and take back their country from a government that demands they unite with it on the basis that they are deplorable.

        Like

      • Bill you are correct a couple of hundred organised loons a revolution doesnt make but they could have sparked a greater problem. I think that the far right see themselves as being the fuse to ignite a larger section of society. I imagine that they overestimate the levels of support that they have in the police and the military. I think that they overestimate the support they enjoy from Trump who may like to see them beat people up at his rallies and who might like to see them storm the Capitol building but he owes them nothing and will throw them under the bus the moment it suits him.
        As to Trumps relationship with the military well I guess the military was very happy when Trump increased funding to what equates to the total military budget of Russia but as you say there seems to be problems in the relationship like cutting and running in Syria and Afghanistan must stick in somebodies throat. The door is always open that I may be wrong Im only a working person with a bit of an interest in politics Im well aware of my shortcomings in being able to get across a lot of issues. Im really just trying to get things straight in my head, you guys are a useful sounding board because we disagree.
        If the rioters had been able to hang Pence that may have given Trump the opportunity to invoke Martial law. The only thing that saved Pence’s life was that the Capitol police did their job and didnt go over to the mob as the mob were hoping/expecting.
        Trump may be just acting petulantly with no real aim. He promised winning and he lost congress and he lost the presidency. Republicans are furious with his performance in the Georgia run offs. Politically Trump is dead. The Republican party hate him and theres no road back to the White House via a third party. 70+ million may have voted for him but a percentage of those would just be voting Republican while holding their nose. Candidates down the card did better than Trump which means that Republican voters were more inclined to vote Republican than to vote Trump
        The Democrats should grant statehood to Washington DC its already bigger than 4 states. If you cant sell no taxation without representation in America you should give up selling. Also Puerto Rico should get statehood that would both strengthen democracy and the Democrats. Next they should get rid of the college system and go to President by popular vote like in a democracy. It almost got up in the 70’s I cant see why it wont get up now.
        The people who are most disadvantaged by the electoral system are the poor and the Democrats should do something about that. Elections are always held on a Tuesday a work day and the voting lines are often really long in poor neighborhoods. Biden could nominate more Supreme court justices to overturn a lot of previous crap like the Citizens united decision and the reversal of voting protections that have only recently been returned to state jurisdiction. I dont think that he can change it but Biden should give support ti Arnie Schwarzenegger’s campaign to get rid of Gerrymandering which is a disgrace in a country that claims to be a democracy.
        I gotta disagree about Biden not being a strong candidatehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LFdXzUsrhyohttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kxBca4eGmcMhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y5TiyJ7JWREhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1GzdrNsSLBUhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kLMYW8jFPHghttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ou82IEI2WA8&t=246s

        Like

  27. We know one other thing about what he did after the riot had started. He was phoning Republican congress people to get them to stall the process. We know this because both he and Giuliani phoned the wrong congressman who went public about it. So Im open to arguments about what he was up to. Did he think that the vote could be altered? Did he really believe that Pence’s role was more than ceremonial and that Pence could if he chose send the process back to the states? Were all his actions on the day purposeful or just petulant?

    History is repeating: Dennis Glover on the Capitol Hill riot

    Like

    Reply

  28. An except from an Axios story
    Attorney General Bill Barr stood behind a chair in the private dining room next to the Oval Office, looming over Donald Trump. The president sat at the head of the table. It was Dec. 1, nearly a month after the election, and Barr had some sharp advice to get off his chest. The president’s theories about a stolen election, Barr told Trump, were “bullshit.”
    White House counsel Pat Cipollone and a few other aides in the room were shocked Barr had come out and said it — although they knew it was true. For good measure, the attorney general threw in a warning that the new legal team Trump was betting his future on was “clownish.”
    Trump had angrily dragged Barr in to explain himself after seeing a breaking AP story all over Twitter, with the headline: “Disputing Trump, Barr says no widespread election fraud.” But Barr was not backing down. Three weeks later, he would be gone.
    The relationship between the president and his attorney general was arguably the most consequential in Trump’s Cabinet. And in the six months leading up to this meeting, the relationship between the two men had quietly disintegrated. Nobody was more loyal than Bill Barr. But for Trump, it was never enough.

    Like

    Reply

  29. You support the conspiracy theory that the election was stolen.
    You support the conspiracy theory that well placed Democrats and Republicans weakened the Capitol security to make Trump look bad.
    You support the conspiracy theory that Antifa was involved at the Capitol because an eye witness saw guys wearing MAGA caps backwards.
    Yet your conclusion is that Im delusional.

    Like

    Reply

  30. Steve, Like you I’m information poor and trying to understand what is happening in America too. As you say, Trump is gone, so hopefully now you can recover from your TDS.

    But then at the end you link to a schmaltzy, vomit inducing Lincoln Project video which presents Biden as a knight on a white horse. Must admit I did like some of the Lincoln Project anti Trump videos but as soon as I saw their pro Biden schmaltz I realised they were phoney too.

    So, how can information poor, time stretched people like you and me understand American reality now that the dominant media channels and political power has been taken over by Dems / Deep State / Big Tech / Wall Street / the cultural elites? Thomas Frank calls them the coalition of the aghast. How can we understand and see through the new ascendant woke McCarthyism to what lies underneath?

    My answer is to seek out those anti Trump / anti Dems / anti cultural elites/ pro free speech / contrarian commentators that do exist, eg. Glenn Greenwald, Matt Taibbi, Thomas Frank / Glen Loury & John McWhorter. I’m happy to pay them a few $ on substack and patreon since I now know that Big Tech, as part off the alliance, is censoring free speech.

    Your answer seems to be to pick up “information” from sites that promote TDS and spray them around indiscriminately.

    Like

    Reply

    • “How can we understand and see through the new ascendant woke McCarthyism to what lies underneath?

      My answer is to seek out those anti Trump / anti Dems / anti cultural elites/ pro free speech / contrarian commentators that do exist, eg. Glenn Greenwald, Matt Taibbi, Thomas Frank / Glen Loury & John McWhorter. I’m happy to pay them a few $ on substack and patreon since I now know that Big Tech, as part off the alliance, is censoring free speech.”

      I have only looked at a small amount of those you mention (and not at Thomas Frank). Certainly they are a refreshing change from all aspects of the mainstream. Being anti Trump, anti Dems, anti cultural elites, pro free speech and especially contrarian is certainly better than its opposite, conformist.

      But is it how to understand what lies underneath?

      All except “contrarian” reflects a fairly widespread view perhaps held by a majority in the USA. To a certain extent it “sees through” its opposites. (Though it accidentally omits most GOP politicians who tend to be both anti-Trump and anti Dems with varying attitudes towards “cultural elites” and “free speech”). But any improved version of that still could not imply even mere “understanding” let alone rational (theoretical) analysis.

      The positive thing about being contrarian is that it actually requires thinking and analysing independently as opposed to the more common efforts to “seek out” those who put forward some view and decide which of them to trust and follow.

      That common approach isn’t how science works. It isn’t about seeking out a view to trust. Its about learning what is already known and discovering what isn’t.

      When most of the audience joined Brian in chanting “We are all individuals”, somebody remarked “I’m not”.

      That is a beginning for analysis of what lies underneath.

      The small amount that I’ve seen from those listed indicates that they may have interesting information relevant to analysis but they haven’t got far beyond the blindingly obvious, let alone penetrated to the essence that lies underneath appearances. I think all the ones I have heard of espouse viewpoints that I don’t agree with as well as obvious truisms that everybody ought to agree with.

      I’m not sure how well “Woke McCathyism” expresses what is common to their conflicting perspectives. It might be a useful pejorative description that supercedes “politically correct”. But at best it is a useful description of some of the surface phenomena rather than explaining what lies underneath.

      We are still in the silly season. Lots of stuff is up in the air and has not yet landed.

      Like

      Reply

    • Bill yes I did link to the corny Lincoln project pro Biden ads but because they support my point. The Lincoln project people are masters at producing ads that will speak to ordinary voters not to people who are political junkies. And here we see why Biden was the near perfect candidate. They could find clips of republicans saying what a great bloke he is. He has decades of Senate experience and 8 years as VP, a back story to die for, man of faith, harsh childhood tragic widower, grieving father and a father devoted to his family. If you look other places you see the widow of John McCain campaigning for him and people on the left denouncing him as a Republican. You couldnt make up a better candidate except for his age. The Republicans were reduced to saying that he wasnt the same Joe Biden that he was in the past a dead give away that his past was a problem for them. To ridicule his mask wearing during a pandemic well thats a desperation move.
      Yes Trump held entertaining large rallies but as I read years ago Jack Lang held big rallies and that reflected the enthusiasm of his supporters but not the will of the people.
      PS I think that we can see in Trump organising a march on the Capitol that its a forced move. I would assume he didnt think that the mob would do anything useful, the game was over he could resign or keep playing a lost game with desperate moves. He chose desperate moves or even a tip the table over moment.

      Like

      Reply

  31. Here’s a reasonably plausible FBI account of someone who actually speaks at pro-Trump rallies rather than an outsider, who enthusiastically participated in the “storming” of the Capitol (and filmed himself doing so).

    Click to access 1-20-21-us-v-brandon-straka-complaint-affidavit.pdf

    Charges are essentially disorderly conduct, obstructing police, disrupting Congress.

    No pretence in the charge that this was an “insurrection”. Nor that speaking in support of it and actively participating in it was even riot, let alone insurrection.

    Not much doubt Trum’s rhetoric stoked up the crowd. Plausible that he did welcomed exactly what this supporter did.
    Obvious that what the militia types did was against his interests and obvious that they were antifa opponents, not antifa.
    That’s unambiguously protected speech in the USA and unambiguously not inciting insurrection.

    Chief Justice of SCOTUS won’t be presidiing over the “trial” in the Senate (only has a duty to do so for trial of a President).

    If they keep this “trial” very short they will still look even stupider than the impeachment over Ukraine.

    It may help GOP opponents of Trump to use his stoking up disorder when fighting against his open declaration that they are going to be primaried. But I doubt that will help them much. Many GOP Senators and some House Representatives have an independent support base, but it seems a safe bet that Trumpists will be the largest opposition in Congress as well as outside.

    Trump is doing and saying nothing, thus avoiding interrupting his opponents while they are making a mistake.

    But the media is still obsessed about him.

    Like

    Reply

  32. My understanding is that the police hit people with slam dunk minor charges while they work out what to charge the guys wandering the halls with hand cuffs and the guys who beat a police officer to death and the people who rifled through congress peoples offices. Personally I have a soft spot for the guy who took the lectern because that was just funny and Qanon shaman is clearly insane but I would like to see paramilitaries in prison and isolated so that they cant join the Arian Brotherhood.
    As to the Impeachment trial I think that is just theatre and an opportunity for the Dems to play a bit of wedge politics. If they couldnt get him for the treason (they didnt even try for treason) he did over Ukraine they will never get him on this. (There is no smoking gun) but the GOP is in a different headspace now that he could run a third party. He will go quiet on that until after impeachment trial is over. PS disappointed that he didnt pardon Joe Exotic and didnt I post a clip of Rudy getting sued by Dominion where in the name of free speech did that go?

    Like

    Reply

  33. Tulsi Gabbard (combat veteran Iraq war, Democrat, 2020 Presidential candidate, accused by Hilary Clinton of being a Russian asset):
    “The mob who stormed the capitol to try to stop Congress from carrying out its constitutional responsibilities were behaving like domestic enemies of our country. But let us be clear, the John Brennan’s, the Adam Schiff’s, the oligarchs in Big Tech who are trying to undermine our constitutionally protected rights and turn our country into a police state with KGB style surveillance are also domestic enemies, and much more powerful and therefore dangerous than the mob who stormed the Capitol …. (cuts to John Brennan clip) …”

    Like

    Reply

  34. https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/26/us/politics/capitol-police-national-guard.html
    Capitol Police chief apologizes for security failures during the assault, including a delay in calling for Guard troops
    Yogananda D. Pittman, the acting chief of police, also confirmed that the Capitol Police Board, an obscure panel made up of three voting members, had initially declined a request two days earlier for National Guard troops and then delayed for more than an hour as the violence unfolded on Jan. 6 before finally agreeing to a plea from the Capitol Police for National Guard troops
    (lots more detail in the article)

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

  35. Well the dust is starting to settle in the GOP and the future is Trump. Virtually everyone who attempted to distance themselves from the orange loon have faced censure from their state branches. The GOP will hold firm in the senate and find Trump very innocent, the 10 who voted against him in the house well they should start looking for other jobs. Big names will fall McCain, McConnell, Chaney. CPAC is next month, will Trump start the rebound then?

    Like

    Reply

    • Not yet settled but will certainly be fought out at the primaries over the next two years as Trump declared on Jan 6. Far more important than the state committees are Trump’s base among voters at the primaries. That is now only partially reflected in state committees and Congress. At Statewide level Senators and Governors often have a personal base not entirely dependent on party and Federal Senators have 6 year terms. Local representatives opposed to Trumpism for lower Houses are likely to either lose to Trumpists in primaries in red states and districts or to Democrats as a result of Trumpists who lost in the primaries not voting for them at the subsquent general election in purple States and districts. That is why far higher proportion of Senators oppenly denounce Trump than Representatives. But proportion is low for both so most GOP opponents will continue to not speak out. I think that is why Trump went on the offensive to attack them and force a split that they do not want.

      Result would certainly be seats lost to Democrats in purple States and districts so Democrats are very pleased.

      But a corrupt and ineffectual Democrat administration will now be facing a large militant right wing anti-establishment opposition party with both a mass base and a substantial representation in Congress while talking exclusively to themselves and presiding over an accelerating continued decline for most Americans.

      What’s missing is a left opposed to both the establishment and the right. There were recently some protests in Portland directed against Democrats from antifa and BLM anarchist types but I have not yet seen anything resembling a genuine left that could become a mass movement.

      Would be worth researching US blogs and web sites of minor groups to see what ideas are being expressed. I haven’t looked for years now and things must be changing.

      So far the long standing ruling class approach of “divide and rule” is working as the anger among the oppressed is being directed at each other. But the result is also a lot less acquiescence and a lot more anger that will eventually be directed against the oppressors. Stable rule requires acquiescence, not just division.

      Like

      Reply

    • I gave up at 2’30” of 15′ or so. Have read coverage of Gamestop in newspapers. Interesting phenomenon. But have not previously encountered such bizarre pseudoleft enthusiasm for Wall Street “revolution”. My impression from those 2’30” is that the commentator is genuinely EXCITED.

      No wonder Elon Musk has an automobile non-manufacturer capitalized on the stock markets as worth far more than the others that do actually manufacture (and really hates short sellers).

      Like

      Reply

  37. If you are interested this guy is really good at explanationshttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T_IMBhDy1Jk
    Dont give up on the first clip it just gets funnier and funnier. These billionaire short sellers get ruined by kids.

    Like

    Reply

  39. Funny as a car crash.
    Stock market “frothing” prices (and negative interest rates) would be hilarious if they were not well known as the harbingers of depressions that turn masses of people to the right.
    But you would need to study stuff from the nineteenth century to understand that and you won’t.

    Like

    Reply

  40. Some thing must happen after I post because I am putting links on separate lines its annoying to you its annoying to me. Funny yes a bunch of young people taking down Wall street billionaires at their own game its fucking hilarious. If you think that stock market crashes are harbingers of depressions well all I can say is that you should read more heres a start.https://www.cnbc.com/2016/02/04/can-the-markets-predict-recessions-what-we-found-out.html

    Like

    Reply

    • 1. Your take is that what you do often results in frustration of your purpose. With painful slowness you eventually conclude that something must happen after your attempt that frustrates your purpose. But you have not yet advanced to the stage of recognizing that you should try doing something different from what you are doing. Instead you complain about the results.
      2. It annoys you that you get it wrong but you won’t actually experiment with trying new ideas to get it right. For example if what you thought would place it on a new line fails to do so try leaving an extra blank line first so that it is visibly a separate new line, ie new paragraph.
      3. I am trying to figure out how to explain to people that do not have the necessary concepts the nineteenth century explanation of why crashes result from booms. It is interesting that blockages appear along the lines that “but stock market crashes are not always followed by recessions”. It may help. But attempting to follow your thought processes as you keep trying the same thing in the hope it will work differently could be contagious.

      Like

      Reply

  41. There have been 3 major recessions in the last 100 years. The recession of the 1930’s was caused by an unregulated banking system. The recession of 2008 was caused by a deregulated banking system. The recession we are currently in was caused by our response to a pandemic. The stock market gets a lot of bad press but to think that the stock market is the harbinger of depressions is so well 19th century.

    Like

    Reply

    • A harbinger is a warning sign, not a cause. Frothy bubbles are not crashes. They are harbingers of crashes.

      The sheer absurdity of the excitement about the current openly manipulated “short squeeze” bubble will become clear when it (imminently) collapses with the day traders who got whipped up to buy at ridiculous prices who you have cheered on as heroes against Wall Street well deservedly losing the small amounts of money they use to help provide liquidity to the markets from their wild imaginations that they are now the owners of much larger wealth that has magically grown from nothing but has not actually been realized by selling. They are telling each other to hold the line and not sell because they know that as soon as they do start selling the price collapses. The Tulip mania could have continued for ever if only the speculators could hold out and never sell (and that was well before modern financial markets with facilities for short selling that can amplify these frenzies in a short squeeze).

      Frenzies to make money grow from nothing are an indication of lack of profitable opportunities for actual investment in exploiting labour power and an early warning about underlying problems in the flow of capital between sectors that become visible first in the financial markets but eventually in actual production and the prices at which real products rather than fantasy speculations are exchanged. Most of “Wall Street” is fantasy speculation rather than actual wealth. They are not getting richer from Magic Money Tree efforts during a pandemic in which actual wealth extraction is paralysed but are simply imaginiing that they are richer while unable to find much that is actually profitable to invest in.

      The regular nineteenth century industrial cycle was so long ago that people do seriously believe that features of the “unregulated” banking system are the cause of the few major crises that have remained, which could of course be overcome by regulation. A long forgotton view holds that it is the anarchy of private ownership of capitalist production that makes crises inevitable and requires expropriation by the working class rather than just regulation.

      I will try to write a post in which such discussion would be relevant but will wait till at least after the present absurdity has popped and the fact of that has sunk in. Meanwhile it isn’t relevant to this post.

      Like

      Reply

  42. Just let me prove to you that the market is the harbinger of nothing at least we will have had a complete conversation.
    The stock market crashed on the following dates
    19 Oct 1987
    27 Oct 1997
    10 March 2000
    11 Sept 2001
    Feb 2007 Chinese stock market crashes
    11 Oct 2007 (I mistook this one for the housing bubble bursting)
    16 Sept 2008 (the real housing bubble bursts)
    6 May 2010
    12 June 2015 Chinese stock market crash.
    18 Aug 2015 Stock market crash
    20 Sept 2018 crypto currency crash
    20 Feb stock market crash
    So there we have it 12 crashes but only two recessions caused by the housing bubble and the pandemic.
    Now you say Steve you have a point thanks and we move on.
    I would love a thread where people could discuss macro economics.

    Like

    Reply

    • What you describe as a series of crashes is a long period of the stock market continuing to rise faster than the actual economy, with occasional partial “corrections”. That continuing rise is a harbinger that there will eventually be an actual Depression. The fact that it has been so prolonged (which does make the term “harbinger” seem inappropriate) suggests that the underlying disproportions of which these surface phenomena are a warning are much deeper than what has been described as “recession”. It only “seems” inappropriate because there is an ACTUAL growing disconnect between asset prices and values which in the nineteenth century was followed fairly quickly by the industrial crisis. Since the Great Depression that has been successfully postponed by measures that intensify the underlying disproportions.

      There is now widespread belief in Magical Money Trees and even negative interest rates are not seen as a warning.

      I will probably write something on macro economics here but won’t have much time for discussion.

      I again recommend Maksakovsky “The Capitalist Cycle” and won’t be inclined to respond to anybody that hasn’t. It is short and available free at Library Genesis.

      Like

      Reply

  43. It seems to me that theres a lot of difference between the Tulip mania of 1637 and Gamestop. Firstly the price of tulips was bid up to astronomical prices because people wanted to own tulips.
    Gamestop is about Hedge funds engaging in naked short selling. Tulips at least had some value and rich people wanted to flaunt their wealth by owning these exotic plants.
    Naked shorting (its illegal) is designed to run a struggling company into the ground and often results in that company folding and sending its employees to the unemployment line. Naked shorting adds nothing to the economy, its aimed to generate a profit by destroying businesses.
    So a bunch of ordinary people realised that they could squeeze the shorts. The price of gamestop was driven down by the hedgefunds and now it is being bid up by the hedge funds. The reddit guys did reverse the trend but the trend was driven both ways by the hedge funds.
    Naked short selling is where people trade more shares than actually exist. My understanding is that 120% of gamestops shares are in play. Clearly the hedge funds have been selling shares that didnt exist and now they have been caught not by the SEC but by a bunch of average Janes who can now sell because the hedge funds must have those shares they dont have a choice.

    Like

    Reply

    • The Tulip mania was not about people wanting to own tulips but about people wanting to buy assets that they could sell at a higher price to make money from the Magic Money Tree.

      Short selling more shares than actually exist has obvious risks.

      Even short selling an obvious scam like Elon Musk is risky because the market can remain insane for longer than the short seller can hold out.

      The theory that zombie businesses get driven broke by speculators is popular among promoters of zombie businesses.

      The popularity of media accounts of a heroic “bunch of average Janes” beating Wall Street at its own game reflects the “Strange Times” in which people avidly consume strange tales about armed insurrections led by a Kremlin stooge at the White House, negative interests to stimulate the economy and the Magic Money Tree.

      Lots of people are losing interest in what they are being told by raving lunatics. Unfortunately they are moving to the right since there is no left and the pseudoleft keep echoing raving lunacy that people assume comes from the left.

      Like

      Reply

  44. You think that Elon Musk is running a scam? Charlie Munger disagrees and in financial matters I would bow to Charlies judgment. Musk is revolutionizing production although I have disagreements with some of the claims that he made on Battery Day. To think that GameStop is a zombie company would indicate that you dont understand the concept of a zombie company or that you have no idea about GameStop as a business. In 2020 GameStop had $6 Billion in revenue. How can a company with that sort of revenue be a zombie company. What GameStop is, is a company that is not profitable and requires a remake of their business model not having Wall Street vultures trying to drive them into bankruptcy.
    If you really cared about the 14,000 people who work at GameStop you would be happy that the Hedge funds are getting served. But do you really care about the 14,000 people who work at GameStop no I didnt think so.

    Like

    Reply

  45. There’s an interesting video series: “Rising WITH THE HILL’S KRYSTAL BALL AND SAAGAR ENJETI”

    https://thehill.com/hilltv/rising

    Just watched current session on GameStop.

    https://thehill.com/hilltv/rising/536438-rising-january-29-2021?jwsource=cl

    Explains rather briefly that free trading services like RobinHood seen as helping Main Street unite against Wall Street actually has a very clear business model. Like other free services its users are not its customers. Its revenue comes from selling their trading data for orders that are executed at normal retail speeds to Wall Street high frequency traders who buy the data from them so that they can make money by “front running”. When small users are buying stocks the high frequency trader can jump in ahead and buy that stock milliseconds before the price rise that tends to follow increased demand and then sell it to the slow retail buyer at a very slightly higher price that is hardly noticeable.

    Overall a larger amount is paid by the trader for the “free” service.

    Anybody with significant capital to invest pays the fees necessary to access the markets at more optimal rates.

    RobinHood actually works for and is paid by the Sheriff of Nottingham and knows it.

    But so utterly pathetic is the level of understanding of how things work that media openly promoting and cheering on this stuff is able to portray itself as supporting heroic battles against Wall Street.

    More complicated is the role of populist media like “Rising”. While exposing such scams they do so on the same populist basis as Trump in telling people the system is rigged against them by the ruling class.

    It is a distinctly “left” populism. It isn’t as obviously fake posturing as what I call the pseudoleft. Maybe they are pseudos but the impression I get is that they are genuinely hostile to the ruling class and side against it.

    But their solutions are thoroughly within the most right wing of mainstream bourgeois politics.

    People with negligible capital should be able to trade in stocks on a fair basis without getting ripped off by scams. That’s how the system was promised to work so they relentlessly expose that it actually works to make the rich richer.

    So the problem arises. Given that this stuff has a real audience. How does one get past it to enable people to grasp the rather simple and obvious concept that the rich get richer because they own the means of production so that the poor have to work for them to make them richer?

    The communist program that the working class must take ownership and actually run the economy by taking state power has been completely obliterated. There concepts simply aren’t present in mainstream discourse.

    Yet the times cry out for understanding those concepts.

    Like

    Reply

  46. Now thats what I call progress on Jan 28 I link to “Rising” You attempt to look at it but say that you can’t get past the 2 minute 30 seconds mark and now just 3 days later you are linking to a whole series of “Rising”
    Look I think that there is a left in America but its just not the left that you want. It stretches from a Billionaire like Charlie Munger who argues for higher taxation of the rich and universal single payer health care to Elizabeth Warren who argues for regulation of the finance sector to Bernie, AOC and Paul Krugman. And yes these people are just the reformist left but they do have a mass base and you must meet people where they are. If you try to meet them where you are well you just end up talking to me and I think that we can both agree thats going no where.
    None of the stuff Rising puts up is new its just presented in an enthusiastic manner.
    I agree with you that the major league is ownership of the means of production but we unfortunately are playing in the minors.

    Like

    Reply

  47. Just to be clear Im not against short selling its a useful tool to expose corruption. It was short sellers who blew the whistle on Enron

    https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2002-jan-20-fi-petruno20-story.html

    The problem is that the regulatory authorities here and in the USA are as useful as a bag of turds.
    The don’t police their rules they don’t enforce the law. I read that the naked shorting of GameStop was 120% but in one of the clips that Arthur linked to Krystal claims it to be 140%
    Its illegal but no one gets caught. Its just like at the end of The Big Short (one of my favorite movies) they say and how many people went to jail after this massive fraud, one.
    Theres a reason why the left is reformist and that is because the system seems to need a lot of reform. My opinion is that you have to be working with people until you hit a dead end with reform and then you can say hey we need to take this to another level.

    Like

    Reply

  49. The stock market has 2 functions one to raise capital so that businesses can start or expand. The other is the sale of pre existing shares. Again and again I hear people on the left say that its a magic money tree or its a casino. These people elevate a secondary function to the primary position and they are wrong. Speculation leads to overvaluation which leads to tears but nothing other than paper money is destroyed. I may have bought a tulip bulb from you for $1000 and then realised that its only worth $1 but nothing real has changed. I still have the bulb you have the $1000. Only our ideas about the value of the Tulip have changed. Nothing material has changed except that $1000 has gone from my pocket to yours.

    Like

    Reply

  50. Theres that great scene in The Big Short where Steve Carell’s team goes to Florida to investigate rumors that theres a housing bubble. They end up in a strip club trying to interview a lap dancer while she works.(of course its Hollywood) Steve is aghast when he says to her “so you have a mortgage?” She says “No I have 5 plus the condo” its a great scene.
    Of course the Australian housing market has been in a bubble for decades. Steve Keen famously predicted that it would burst I think in 2008. I think that the bubble has continued to inflate because of immigration. Hey what would I know Steve Keen was an Associate Professor. Im just a guy who watches movies about housing bubbles.

    Like

    Reply

Leave a reply to steve owens Cancel reply