Fascist President spurs on mob to invade Capitol; woman in critical condition after being shot

January 6, 2021 • 3:00 pm

Well, 2021 isn’t starting well after all. All I can do is be upset and pass on the news to others who share my feeling. Here are links:

All from the New York Times:

Each bullet point goes to a link:

It’s a good time to be a news reporter, and a bad time to be an American—even a Democrat. It’s bad for all of us.

Oh, and now there are reports that a woman is in critical condition after being shot on the Capitol grounds.

105 thoughts on “Fascist President spurs on mob to invade Capitol; woman in critical condition after being shot

  1. Also several police have been taken away in ambulances. Prosecute Trump for all his crimes or give up on the rule of law!

      1. Only if their hats proclaim “Make America Great Again”. I believe it is a slogan promoted by a rather unsavoury comedian.

          1. The MPs do like to assert that they are police first and military second. Which I doubt the actual police believe, and certainly means that Joe Squaddy considers them to be traitors.

  2. Lawyers in the house…can Trump be arrested for any of this? Or at least sued…he’s clearly making false statements that are directly causing violence.

    I know it’s tenuous at best but enough is enough…this man has reached new depths of depravity.

    1. A bunch of crimes to do with incitement, actually.
      All overshadowinig the conspiracy and electoral crimes of THE OTHER DAY on that amazing Georgia phone call. Or the emoluments clause of the Constitution (which even lawyers had to look up – these grifters found such obscure crimes – almost as a hobby. Amazing).

      Oh. All these before we even start on that gang’s financial shenanigans which I wrote an article about lately in my column because it is an area I know more about:

      https://themoderatevoice.com/the-financial-criminality-of-trumpworld-an-expert-perspective/

      But I’m off the clock. And no prosecutor will touch them/him. It is a reality that you CAN be above the law in America given a bad actor at the top and… most importantly, his enablers in government (turtle and non-turtle) and base deplorables.

      Let’s just move right along, forget the whole 4 years of horror I say. They’ve lost everything now, with Georgia, their demographics are a disaster and if we don’t have covid… we can breathe easy.
      Best,

      D.A., J.D.,
      NYC
      Me breathing easy, with pooch:
      https://whyevolutionistrue.com/2020/06/10/photos-of-readers-93/

  3. Pretty much as expected. At some point the gunfire will start – according to the Beeb’s Washington correspondent, it hasn’t.
    Yet.
    While all eyes are on the capital/ Capitol … he’s got supporters pretty much everywhere. What are they doing?

  4. It’s a bad day for everyone. I’ve never been to the states but I’m enraged and disgusted. And the Twitter political football being played at the same time this is going on doesn’t help. Someone I like and admire even tried to argue that this was no worse, or rather just as bad, as state capitol riots last year, as opposed to something in a league of its own.

    Oh America, sometimes the best and sometimes the worst of humanity. Solidarity.

  5. Ilhan Omar is supposedly drawing up articles of impeachment, though as other readers have posted above I would have thought the 25th Amendment would be more appropriate / expeditious.

    1. Somebody, anybody, other than Omar, please. Articles of Impeachment from her will just inflame Trump’s base even more. It would be much better if it came from a more conservative Dem in a red or purple state.

  6. You live in a banana republic! I’d bet if the protesters were black the security services would not have shown such restraint. If you join the security services you are probably an authoritarian – more likely to be I should say – & more likely to sympathise with Trump. If as Cruz claimed approx 39% of Americans really believe that the election was somehow, without evidence but with wishful thinking, stolen, then that is probably reflected in those security forces. Or more so as I would guess that there is lower representation of black & other ethnic minorities in security forces.

    It appears they were not prepared & were happy to let the people in. Who in earth was in charge?!

    1. “It appears they were not prepared & were happy to let the people in.”

      How that “appears” to you is noted. You know that by some sort of other “way of knowing”? I note that security officers have subsequently shown up in militaryesque body armor. Do I reasonably take it that you approve of that in this particular instance. (I do.)

      Per the NY Times, Senator Ben Sasse (R-Nebraska): “Americans are better than this: Americans aren’t nihilists. Americans aren’t arsonists. Americans aren’t French revolutionaries taking to the barricades.”

      The gratuitous dig at the French is noted. (I’m reminded of Donald Rumsfeld during the 2003 Iraq invasion getting in a dig at the French with his “carrying an accordian into battle” comment.) I’m sick to the back teeth of hearing Amuricuns cavalierly saying, “Americans are better than this.” This U.S. capitol incident today puts the lie to “American Exceptionalism” and “the indispensable nation.”

      1. I have no opinion on body armour & when it should or should not be worn. However, as I said, qualifying my words with ‘appears’ because I do not have full access to all the facts, when Black Lives Matter protestors were there, there were pictures of men in camouflage in ranks on the steps. That was clearly not seen as necessary for yesterday’s riot, filled as it was with right wing lunatics, KKK supporters, & Nazis, as well as ordinary people who felt cheated.

        Perhaps you feel the people in charge of security just miscalculated. Maybe. I do not know or profess to know!

        1. There’s a video around that supposedly shows the point at which the protestors overwhelmed the Capitol police and stormed the gates. If it is accurate, it shows they were not at all prepared. There are perhaps a dozen police standing behind flimsy crowd control railings that were easily shoved aside. There’s an order of magnitude more crowd control at the Macy’s Thanksgiving Day Parade. I have to think there were some people in charge who were Trump supporters.

        2. I’m not sure the riots in some cities this year are a good example of police clamping down harshly on protesters. Also, the BLM people who attacked federal buildings (like a courthouse) and police stations were mostly white. Only the looters were majority black, but as far as I know they often had free reign for a few hours until order was restored.

    2. “If you join the security services you are probably an authoritarian . . . .”

      Just who would you have join up with security services and go in harm’s way? Or would you simply defund security services?

      1. Police should come from a broad selection of society & reflect that society. I do not want to be policed by force but by consent. I do not propose defunding police but I do expect the law to treat everyone equally. Is that too much to ask?

        1. I agree. It’s well known that the job attracts those with an authoritarian bent and those who perhaps were bullied as children and are seeking revenge against society. A high school friend of mine fit that description quite well and was an Los Angeles cop for most of his adult life. The police should be actively preventing the hiring of people with such tendencies and rooting out those that accidently pass through the filter. Furthermore, they need to define the job such that the necessary authority is used in ways that don’t incite injury and resentment. Finally, they need to work harder to preserve life other than their own.

        2. I agree, too. Unfortunately self-selection is a bad idea for police as well as for the military. In the military, conscription helped against the forces being dominated by right wing authoritarians and lovers of violence.

  7. The last time anything like this invasion of the Capitol happened was in the War of 1812 when the British troops attacked the Capitol.

    However, in that case it was foreign enemies. In this present case it is domestic enemies.

    1. Do we have any gunboats we can send up the Potomac – without bumping into any bridges, hopefully – to provide covering fire in support of the police/ National Guard? Sandhurst (that’s the English equivalent of Arlingpoint or Westerton) would have been most remiss to have not carried out lots of war games annually on this very target.

      Oh, sorry, I’m forgetting that such would require the presence of a backbone in our Prime Invertebrate.

    2. The FBI has been talking about the danger from right-wing extremists for decades. But Congress has never really let them off the leash to address the problem. I suspect now, they might.

  8. Vladimir Putin never scored the intended payoff for his investment in Trump’s 2016 election — the lifting of Magnitsky Act sanctions that deny his oligarchs access to the main channels of international commerce to launder his and their filthy lucre — but he must be smiling in satisfaction right now over the diminished world-standing of US democracy.

  9. An explosive device is found at the R.N.C., and the D.N.C. is evacuated.

    I missed that on first read. Was it part of their stockpile for the insurrection, or one dropped by some red-capped “well regulated militia-man” taking it to a target site?

    Looking on the bright side, could this possibly lead to the end of America’s love affair with privately-held weapons?

    1. I’ve been listening to NPR for any criticism of this killing by a law enforcement officer. I’ve not heard any so far. NPR instead focuses its criticism on there not being sufficient security. Perhaps NPR believes that the Trump protesters are less provoked by military body armor than other groups of protesters.

  10. Printshops working on Biden memorabilia with reference to 46 may do well to hold their presses, and Wm Henry Harrison’s record, that I fervently hoped would be broken in Jan/Feb 2017 may yet fall.

      1. He’s predicting (or alluding to, I’d say) that Joe Biden may only live a short time in office. Hence the WH Harrison reference. (He hoped tRump would croak early in his “administration”. This will get scare quote from me from now on. It deserves them.)

  11. At first I was horrified by this. I was alarmed by the lax, passive non-response by what seemed to be an overwhelmed capital police force. However, there is an upside to this. The country and the world at large will get a dramatic taste of how Trumpism is playing out. And because I’m crass, I will say that this is of tremendous political benefit to the Democrats. My greatest concern is that the limit has been tested and exceeded, and this breaks a boundary for future insurrections. They might only try to go farther. I wonder whether the insurrectionists, once they were inside the capital and relatively unimpeded, were surprised and unprepared to take advantage of the situation. Search up like trump- thrashing around with no strategy.

    1. Some are tweeting that the DC Mayor requested the National Guard be deployed last night but Trump refused her request. Not verified but sounds about right. Trump wants the spectacle. He knows he isn’t going to win this but making Congressmen and supporters do his bidding winds his crank.

      1. I heard that rumor reported mid-day, and my face dropped as I wondered if this might be a serious coup attempt. I’ve lived through three successful coups in my adapted country, Ecuador, and I can certify that the involvement of the military or police is the key to a good coup. So I was really disturbed by this rumor.

        But now I have heard that the reason for the non-deployment of the DC National Guard was because of recent restrictive policies designed to prevent them from being used for political purposes as they had been during the BLM protests. It was not Trump who refused to deploy them, but rather the Pentagon (though maybe Trump did have something to say about it). I don’t know more, so there could be something nefarious behind this, but it might have this innocent explanation. It will be interesting to investigate this more.

        1. I would think that if the request came from the DC Mayor to protect the city, it would not be considered a political purpose. But I agree that we should wait for the official investigation.

          Although I know why people are calling it a coup attempt, it really wasn’t as far as those that marched into the Capitol. If you watched the MAGAs crossing the Rotunda, they looked like tourists, snapping pictures and videos of the inside. It’s not like they were going to take over the US government. I don’t mean to minimize their presence but they were not organized around any real objective. Even Trump didn’t instruct them to do anything specific, as far as I know. I think he only wanted the spectacle of power and support in his name.

            1. Yes, but I later realized that they were all live-streaming the coup for their compatriots who couldn’t get time off to come to Washington. Some were presumably making video to incite consumers of their alt-right podcasts and radio shows. I saw some tweeted pics identifying some of them as well-known hosts and guests of such things.

  12. WHERE tonight, with 13 more days still and with an UNfit, an UNstable holder of it, is that ” football ” = that thing which holds the ” keys ” to UNlock the beaucoup … … nuclear weapons’ silos’ missiles out HERE within my Midwest ? This thing is always to BE with / within the STAT – purview of this country’s president. WHERE tonight … … and for the next several days’ time … … IS it ?

    Blue

    1. This is a moment for our country of
      profound humiliation and shame =
      THE first of its type in 245 years’ time.
      06 January y2021.

      “Evil has come to our great house; I weep
      That all our foes are wolves, and we are sheep.”
      — The Shahnameh

      IF these domestic terrorists / thugs were to have been,
      of any and all colors, only or nearly only women
      and girls, well, … … AllWeAll already .k n o w.
      what would be happening to Us Specific Ones … … right now.

      Blue

      1. My point in re Those of Us who loathed
        the current president of: 21 January y2017, and of thus:

        http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/womens-march and
        2017 Women’s March, a political rally that included marches
        in Washington, DC, and subsequently worldwide
        Women’s March on Portland
        Women’s March on Seattle
        2018 Women’s March
        2019 Women’s March
        2020 Women’s March

        Blue

        1. Everything about women and girls protesting ? Protesting against Trump and his Various Vicious Gangs, We Women and Girls, SOOOO UNlike those criminal men of all colors of 06 January y2021, are .ALREADY ALMOST ALWAYS … … NOW … … dehumanizingly and violently sexualized and utterly dismissed. Arrests .ALREADY ARE ALMOST ALWAYS. all – consuming.

    2. I subscribe to Dr Steven Pinker’s
      p684 – quotation / precept from his Better Natures:

      Depending on how you look at it,
      the late Tsutomu Yamaguchi
      is either the world’s luckiest man or the world’s unluckiest man.
      Yamaguchi survived the atomic blast at Hiroshima, and then made
      an unfortunate choice as to where to go
      to flee the devastation: Nagasaki.
      He survived that blast as well and lived
      another 65 years, passing away in 2010,
      at the age of 93.

      A man who survived
      the only two n u c l e a r strikes in history
      deserves our respectful attention.

      Before he died, he offered a prescription
      for peace in the NUCLEAR age:
      ” The only people who should be allowed
      TO GOVERN countries WITH nuclear weapons
      are mothers, those who are still breast – feeding
      their babies. ”

      Blue

      1. Ohh I remember that one. I’ve bought that book for myself, read it 3 tines, and bought it as a gift for 3 of my friends. Ditto Enlightenment Now.

        Pinker rules. He’s PCC (E)’s most valuable friend I’d say. 😉
        D.A.
        NYC

  13. It’s being reported that congress will reconvene within the hour to continue with the electoral-vote certification process. It’s unclear if Trump’s Vichy Republicans will persist in their bullshit swing-state “objections.”

    In the meantime, Twitter has removed Trump’s last two tweets and locked his account for the next 12 hours.

    Stranger than fiction.

    1. Well, the right and smart thing would be to withdraw their objections. So I’m betting Ted Cruz will continue his.

      1. I suspect they will still likely lodge their objections (to do otherwise would be a tacit concession they were bullshit to begin with), but will waive the allotted two-hour argument as to each objection.

        Just a gut feeling.

        1. With the absolute self-centeredness of folks like Cruz, he might waive the allotted time just because he doesn’t want to be in the office late. Or because he figures that if nobody’s watching it on TV, he gains no benefit from grandstanding any further.

        2. Just found out that Rodgers (R – Washington) has announced she’s going to withdraw her objection. Though obviously she’s not one of the big names that might signal a sea change. Still, it’s something.

            1. She’s got no skin in the game anymore, now that she’s lost, and doesn’t need to please Donald Trump for the sake of her political future.

              Though I will say that, in watching her speaking on the senate floor, withdrawing her objection, she seemed sincere. It’s probably liberating finally to speak her own mind, rather than endlessly to repeat the canned answers her handlers had programmed her to give to every question on the campaign trail.

  14. I don’t think it can be directly pinned on Trump, unless he specifically incited followers to storm the Capitol. He, Republicans and Right Wing media made countless, baseless assertions that they feel the election was stolen from them, whipping up their followers. But even that would fall under the 1st Amendment, as far I can tell (unless there are direct incitements).

    As I see it, Trump is gone in a few days, and it would be better if cooler heads prevailed now, and let this play out as orderly as possible. I don‘t like the authoritarian tendency in the US public, where actions of individuals are blamed on politicians, typically in a highly partisan manner. The right does the same concerning the BLM protests. But individuals, or mobs supposedly have brains, too. They should be held accountable.

    The big problem remains. Republicans and the Right Wing in particular know no shame. This “stolen election” story is just the latest of smears, lies and dirty politics they are known for. They poisoned the Obama Era already with such nonsense, and it seems to go back decades. I halfway suspect that this election narrative is actually a big lie placed to distract from what the Right is doing: accuse the opponent of things you routinely do, and it becomes difficult in the future to even argue about it.

    1. If Trump denied the DC Mayor’s request to deploy the National Guard starting last night is true, then we can really blame it on Trump. If not, Trump is still very guilty. As Senator Ben Sasse just said, “In a play, a rifle hanging above the fireplace in the first act must be fired by the third act.” Trump has been building to this point for four years.

    2. He, Republicans and Right Wing media made countless, baseless assertions that they feel the election was stolen from them, whipping up their followers. But even that would fall under the 1st Amendment …

      No one has suggested charging Trump with a crime for his imprudent and deceitful rabblerousing at his rally on the Ellipse today, and no one has any official governmental power to silence the president, so the First Amendment doesn’t come into play.

      The criticism of Trump for whipping up his supporters certainly constitutes speech protected by the First Amendment.

      1. Your confident “no one” suggests there is some detail that eludes me. Otherwise I see calls for impeachment and holding Trump and Republicans accountable all over the (social) media. E.g. “ Rep. Omar Says She Is Drafting New Articles Of Impeachment Against Trump” (NPR) and Paul right above says “If not, Trump is still very guilty.” (for “imprudent and deceitful rabblerousing”).

        1. Although Trump is guilty, I don’t think it makes much sense to impeach him again and that’s really the only way to charge him with this crime. Twitter just banned Trump for 12 hours so there’s at least that punishment.

        2. Impeachment doesn’t equate charging someone with a crime. That’s a false equivalency the GOP and Trump himself propagated; don’t fall for it.

          1. I don’t “fall” for anything — what‘s about!?

            “Incited by the President, Trump Supporters Violently Storm the Capitol” — Time
            “’Incited by the president’: politicians blame Trump for insurrection on Capitol Hill” — Guardian
            “Every Trump Loyalist Is Complicit in the President’s Incitement of Sedition” — NYMag
            “ Democrats, Republicans blame Trump for inciting ‘coup’ as mob storms Capitol” — Wapo

            What could this possibly mean, if not suggesting that their speach is not protected by the 1st Amendment. I know that impeachment goes another route, which is pursued as well. This may not be 1st Amendment in the narrow sense, but also has an element that free speech is limited somehow for a President.

            1. The papers could simply be talking about vernacular-use-incitement. For the Times and Guardian, it’s possible they’re thinking of the UK requirements for illegal incitement, which AIUI are a bit looser than ours. And call me crazy, but y’know, sometimes news sources sometimes sensationalize things Last possibility is that yes, they are talking about US-legal-definition-of-incitement, and (IANAL but IMO) they’re just wrong.

              Pragmatically, it just ain’t gonna happen. DOJ already said years ago they aren’t going to prosecute the President; you really think they’d do it now, with 2 weeks left in his term?

              1. I started with writing that I think this presidency should be concluded orderly, citing that the 1st amendment is probably covering their speech (which however remains a huge problem). This is an opinion, and it reacts to the apparent fact that many call for consequences. This fact is somehow disputed.

                First you say, I was somehow misled by Republican propaganda (wtf). Now you say, it’s because they aren’t American and are clueless, or use vernacular, or it’s sensationalism.

                But really? Here’s yet another story: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/remove-trump-incitement-sedition-25th-amendment/2021/01/06/b22c6ad4-506d-11eb-b96e-0e54447b23a1_story.html

            2. Trump is either delusional or intentionally lying to his supporters. If he is lying, to what end? If his almost constant lying over the last month (and more) leads to people believing the election was stolen, which is exactly what he said, then a case might be made, and I would suggest a good case, that he incited people to insurrection.

              It appears that White House council agrees according to a Vanity Fair article:

              “The West Wing staffer told the friend that White House Counsel Pat Cipollone was urging White House officials not to speak to Trump or enable his coup attempt in any way, so they could reduce the chance they could be prosecuted for treason under the Sedition Act.”

              White house insiders have stated Trump admitted he lost but said he prefers people believe the election was stolen.
              I believe a rational person can make the case (and many have) that this was the almost inevitable result of Trumps words and actions.

              Even today Trump told the rioters they were “good people” and he loved them.

              Even if Trump is delusional he can still be said to be inciting insurrection. You can be held responsible for things you tried to do even if you believed you were in the right.

              Trump has made it clear what he wants done to people who get in his way, he has since he started campaigning. He even offered to pay for their lawyers and has pardoned people who refused to testify against him.
              Seems like a pattern. Seems like something if not a court decides, certainly congress and the senate should, if Pence and the cabinet fail to invoke the 25th amendment.

              1. Plenty of TV interviews with people who took part in the invasion of the Capitol saying that Trump’s words inspired them to do so.

            3. Yes, the president can say what he wants, but congress, the senate, his cabinet and the VP have options if they decide what the president says crosses some line.

              The president is not a king. Not yet.

            4. Incitement constitutes protected speech under the First Amendment, unless it was intended to, and likely to, incite Imminent violence. See Brandenburg v. Ohio. But no one — neither president nor private citizen — has a First Amendment right not to have his or her non-criminal incitement criticized publicly for precisely what it is. That doesn’t constitute prohibited “punishment” of free speech; instead, it’s constitutionally protected counter-speech.

              Plus, a president can be impeached for what he says, where what he says constitutes malfeasance in office, without offending the First Amendment. That’s precisely what happened with Donald Trump when he got impeached for his phone call with Ukraine president Volodymyr Zelensky, in which Trump tried to shakedown Zelensky to announce a bogus Ukrainian criminal investigation of Joe Biden.

              1. I cited news stories to show that, apparently, journalists think that Trump’s words are not mere words, but that they should be counted as “incitement”; that his words in some way make him partner in crimes and so on, and the consequence (at least) should be his immediate removal from office, where an impeachment attempt was one example. I took “incitement” that it is seem as a violation of the 1st Amendment, or “free speech” in general. Obviously, news calling Trump’s words “incitement” is just speech, or “counterspeech”.

                I can vaguely make out that your point (and Jeremy’s) seems to be about the exact legalese such consequences are based upon, say, not incitement to violence, but malfeasance or something else — fine.

                However, it a specific tangent that is more or less irrelevant when the argument was that (1) the inviduals in the mob are each responsible for their actions. (2) a President should be held to a higher standard, but, it’s a mistake to single out Trump. The entire Right is teeming with talking points similar to his. Fox News is still filled with “stolen election” narratives. The poisoning of minds on the Right goes back decades and is a larger problem not solved by kicking out Trump.

              2. I couldn’t disagree more strongly. First, this mob is listening to every single word Trump says. They love him and what he represents. Second, he’s President and this gives him perhaps the biggest megaphone in the world. Along with that comes the requirement that he use it responsibly. Third, given all this, he knows that when he asks that his followers storm the Capitol, they are likely to do it and that there will likely be violence. Trump is a guy running the projector in a crowded theater who stops the movie and falsely announces that there’s a gunman loose in the crowd. He has power over the situation and knows that people are likely to get hurt by his actions. That makes him culpable in the result.

              3. You apparently don’t disagree in every regard. You agree that a President should be held to a higher standard, as I wrote above. You also seem to agree that Trump (at least) has whipped up the mob.

                That leaves your strong disagreement to (a) you think it’s a Trump-only problem, not to be blamed on Republicans or the Right? (b) you believe that Trump should be removed from office asap? (c) you want some law or rule that should make a politician (or president) accountable by actions of followers, even if no direct call to action can be established (Trump’s words were not direct, immediate enough AFAIK), and/or (d) some other wrinkle

                I disagree with all a, b, c — but not because I don’t see the problem. I see the problem as more widespread and ingrained in US politics, i.e. Fox News is filled with conspiracy theories as we speak. Carlson portayed the woman who got killed as a daughter who won’t come anymore to his viewers etcetera.

                I just don’t know the answer.

    3. If Trump had conceded when he lost, there wouldn’t have been right wing media and GOP politicians making baseless assertions.

      The first amendment is irrelevant. It just means that the people attacking democracy can’t be arrested sjust for the speech. It doesn’t mean their speech has no consequences.

      1. Agreed, but I was reacting to the fairly generic and boring speech he delivered to the Senate after Republicans had just made far better speeches telling the seditious members of their party that they ought not object to the EC vote. It would have been far better to leave the Republicans ideas to hang in the air.

        1. My comment was merely a general one calling attention to the fact that Moscow Mitch is out. Except, of course, he isn’t out yet and won’t be until the two new Georgia senators take their seats.

          1. There will undoubtedly be the demand for recounts and the filing of frivolous lawsuits, all of which must happen before they’ll be seated. Still, if they aren’t seated by January 20, Biden can wait for them. He’ll have plenty to do in the mean time.

  15. Did you see those jibones* and buffoons with their buckle hats, Trump flags (spare me!), and old timey dressup clothes? Were it not DC (with strict gun laws) they’d also be strutting about macho posturing with their GUNS, of course.

    And did you see Turtle McConnel and that human genital wart Ted Cruz trying to look decent by criticizing the idiot deplorable mobs? These are the same mobs they have done everything in their bony grasp to empower, lo, these many years. So amazing – so… detached from objective reality or any kind of ethics.

    Y’know – people in other countries are *watching* this shit-show. I got 2 calls from Australia tonight: “WTF, David?” The Japanese are tut-tutting, the Chinese are grinning and Putin et al are wetting their pants laughing.

    Well Trump was right, eh? They ARE “laughing at us”…now.

    D.A., J.D.
    NYC

    D.A., NYC
    *Great word: https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=jibone

  16. Turns out the woman who was shot was a rioter who was given ample warning not to break into the House.

  17. With complete predictability, some Republicans are staring to blame the riot/insurrection on Antifa. Surprised it took this long.

  18. This is not directed at any of the readers here, who along with the site owner are certainly horrified by events in DC today. I feel embarrassment for America. A significant portion of the American populace has fallen for a selfish and foolish liar. It’s going to take a long time before America can wag it’s finger in the face of other nations, no matter how much they need it, without being laughed at. An enormous loss of credibility on the world stage, and very likely a vindication of Putin’s strategy to have his Manchurian Candidate in the White House.

    1. A former aide to Pence told the BBC’s Today programme this morning (Thursday 7th) that Pence had been too afraid of Trump to stand up to him earlier, but that he should now invoke the 25th Amendment. They were worried that Trump still has the nuclear codes, is commander in chief, and could start a war with Iran, “leaving President Biden holding the bag”.

      1. He can’t “invoke it”. A majority of the cabinet has to vote for it. Then is goes to the congress and both houses have to vote at 2/3 or more for it. This will never happen. It was intended to be hard to do.

  19. NPR today (I’ve been listening since 6:30 this morning) has been wall to wall: “This just demonstrates white privilege.” Basically nothing else. Next program: Oh, more talking heads saying exactly the same thing. I finally turned it off. I think they need to change call letters of my local to WOKE. OK, OK, I got it the first 20 times you said it.

    1. While I am definitely not woke, and a big fan of Jerry for skewering the so-called liberals who practice wokeness for said practice, the reaction to the mob does demonstrate white privilege pretty clearly. If the mob had been black, things would have played out much differently.

      1. Oh, I agree. The Capitol police certainly would have reacted differently to a BLM mob doing the same thing. But, as I noted, I got it the first 20 twenty (or was that 50?) times their various talking heads said it. I am serious, every single segment was more or less the same thing. The entire day. They hardly made any other points.

        1. Yes, Professor Eddie Glaude of Princeton, as well as another Princeton professor in the same department. (Will NPR be similarly featuring, say, John McWhorter?) Professor Glaude’s “unctuous tone” (as described by Hitch in an encounter with him, on Christopher Lydon’s program “The Connection”? ) remains undiminished.

  20. PBS has Ibram X. Kendi on this evening offering his assessment of the Capitol insurrection. ( I wonder if PBS will have John McWhorter and Glenn Loury, among others, on.) There’s also a segment showing foreign leaders’ take. A Chinese spokeswoman compared U.S. support/encouragement of Hong Kong protesters’ incursion into the Hong Kong legislative building with Wed’s Trumpist human primate incursion into the U.S. capitol. On both PBS and NPR, I detect a bit of offense-taking at Chinese, Russian, et al mocking. I.e., get your own house in order before you presume to lecture us.

Leave a Reply