Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse

The New Coffee Room

  1. TNCR
  2. General Discussion
  3. What the hell were they thinking?

What the hell were they thinking?

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved General Discussion
65 Posts 14 Posters 1.0k Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • LuFins DadL LuFins Dad

    @xenon said in What the hell were they thinking?:

    @lufins-dad said in What the hell were they thinking?:

    @jon-nyc said in What the hell were they thinking?:

    @lufins-dad

    Why do you take the rally on the 6th as your t=0?

    Why were they even there? How many of these clowns knew what the significance of Jan 6th was before November? Or even before Trump promoted it?
    Why did 10s of millions absorb the stolen election memetic complex?
    Why did the movement get so much oxygen in right wing media?
    Why did Wood and Powell get so much attention?
    How many 10s of millions of people did he promote Flynn’s tweets to?

    Does any of that stand up to Brandenburg? That’s a decision for the courts. Not you, not me, and sure as hell not Nancy Pelosi. So let’s put it to them.

    If you killed someone’s mother in front of them and the killer got killed in retaliation, that wouldn’t stand up to the Brandenburg test either.

    WTF? I don’t even see the analogy you are shooting for?

    Brandenburg is specifically the benchmark for incitement to violence by public speech.

    X Offline
    X Offline
    xenon
    wrote on last edited by xenon
    #32

    @lufins-dad said in What the hell were they thinking?:

    @xenon said in What the hell were they thinking?:

    @lufins-dad said in What the hell were they thinking?:

    @jon-nyc said in What the hell were they thinking?:

    @lufins-dad

    Why do you take the rally on the 6th as your t=0?

    Why were they even there? How many of these clowns knew what the significance of Jan 6th was before November? Or even before Trump promoted it?
    Why did 10s of millions absorb the stolen election memetic complex?
    Why did the movement get so much oxygen in right wing media?
    Why did Wood and Powell get so much attention?
    How many 10s of millions of people did he promote Flynn’s tweets to?

    Does any of that stand up to Brandenburg? That’s a decision for the courts. Not you, not me, and sure as hell not Nancy Pelosi. So let’s put it to them.

    If you killed someone’s mother in front of them and the killer got killed in retaliation, that wouldn’t stand up to the Brandenburg test either.

    WTF? I don’t even see the analogy you are shooting for?

    Brandenburg is specifically the benchmark for incitement to violence by public speech.

    You can get people riled up to the point of crime, without being criminally liable for riling them up.

    LuFins DadL 1 Reply Last reply
    • jon-nycJ jon-nyc

      @lufins-dad

      Aren’t we discussing impeachment? It’s open and shut. This is the only impeachment in our history that will improve with age.

      But to your question, criminal liability? No way. Not unless we learn something yuge from the investigation.

      LuFins DadL Offline
      LuFins DadL Offline
      LuFins Dad
      wrote on last edited by
      #33

      @jon-nyc said in What the hell were they thinking?:

      @lufins-dad

      Aren’t we discussing impeachment? It’s open and shut. This is the only impeachment in our history that will improve with age.

      But to your question, criminal liability? No way. Not unless we learn something yuge from the investigation.

      If it’s not criminal, then how can he be impeached for High Crime? This is actually worse than the 2019 impeachment and is in fact weakening the impeachment power by Congress.

      The Brad

      jon-nycJ 1 Reply Last reply
      • X xenon

        @lufins-dad said in What the hell were they thinking?:

        @xenon said in What the hell were they thinking?:

        @lufins-dad said in What the hell were they thinking?:

        @jon-nyc said in What the hell were they thinking?:

        @lufins-dad

        Why do you take the rally on the 6th as your t=0?

        Why were they even there? How many of these clowns knew what the significance of Jan 6th was before November? Or even before Trump promoted it?
        Why did 10s of millions absorb the stolen election memetic complex?
        Why did the movement get so much oxygen in right wing media?
        Why did Wood and Powell get so much attention?
        How many 10s of millions of people did he promote Flynn’s tweets to?

        Does any of that stand up to Brandenburg? That’s a decision for the courts. Not you, not me, and sure as hell not Nancy Pelosi. So let’s put it to them.

        If you killed someone’s mother in front of them and the killer got killed in retaliation, that wouldn’t stand up to the Brandenburg test either.

        WTF? I don’t even see the analogy you are shooting for?

        Brandenburg is specifically the benchmark for incitement to violence by public speech.

        You can get people riled up to the point of crime, without being criminally liable for riling them up.

        LuFins DadL Offline
        LuFins DadL Offline
        LuFins Dad
        wrote on last edited by
        #34

        @xenon said in What the hell were they thinking?:

        @lufins-dad said in What the hell were they thinking?:

        @xenon said in What the hell were they thinking?:

        @lufins-dad said in What the hell were they thinking?:

        @jon-nyc said in What the hell were they thinking?:

        @lufins-dad

        Why do you take the rally on the 6th as your t=0?

        Why were they even there? How many of these clowns knew what the significance of Jan 6th was before November? Or even before Trump promoted it?
        Why did 10s of millions absorb the stolen election memetic complex?
        Why did the movement get so much oxygen in right wing media?
        Why did Wood and Powell get so much attention?
        How many 10s of millions of people did he promote Flynn’s tweets to?

        Does any of that stand up to Brandenburg? That’s a decision for the courts. Not you, not me, and sure as hell not Nancy Pelosi. So let’s put it to them.

        If you killed someone’s mother in front of them and the killer got killed in retaliation, that wouldn’t stand up to the Brandenburg test either.

        WTF? I don’t even see the analogy you are shooting for?

        Brandenburg is specifically the benchmark for incitement to violence by public speech.

        You can get people riled up to the point of crime, without being criminally liable for riling them up.

        So you’re saying Bernie is responsible for the gunman that attacked the congressional softball event? Good to know. And should we even talk about Obama’s “They bring a knife, then we bring a gun!”

        The actual violent nutjobs were obviously not influenced by Trump’s words. If they were then they would have peacefully and patriotically made their voices heard.

        What that has to do with answering one criminally violent and horrendous act with another violent and horrendous act escapes me.

        The Brad

        X 1 Reply Last reply
        • LuFins DadL LuFins Dad

          @jon-nyc said in What the hell were they thinking?:

          @lufins-dad

          Aren’t we discussing impeachment? It’s open and shut. This is the only impeachment in our history that will improve with age.

          But to your question, criminal liability? No way. Not unless we learn something yuge from the investigation.

          If it’s not criminal, then how can he be impeached for High Crime? This is actually worse than the 2019 impeachment and is in fact weakening the impeachment power by Congress.

          jon-nycJ Offline
          jon-nycJ Offline
          jon-nyc
          wrote on last edited by
          #35

          @lufins-dad said in What the hell were they thinking?:

          If it’s not criminal, then how can he be impeached for High Crime?

          Because ‘high crimes and misdemeanors’ is a concept that goes back to the Middle Ages and doesn’t mean ‘a violation of federal statute’.

          This is actually worse than the 2019 impeachment and is in fact weakening the impeachment power by Congress.

          I think you will come to think otherwise in the fullness of time.

          Only non-witches get due process.

          • Cotton Mather, Salem Massachusetts, 1692
          LuFins DadL 1 Reply Last reply
          • jon-nycJ jon-nyc

            @lufins-dad said in What the hell were they thinking?:

            If it’s not criminal, then how can he be impeached for High Crime?

            Because ‘high crimes and misdemeanors’ is a concept that goes back to the Middle Ages and doesn’t mean ‘a violation of federal statute’.

            This is actually worse than the 2019 impeachment and is in fact weakening the impeachment power by Congress.

            I think you will come to think otherwise in the fullness of time.

            LuFins DadL Offline
            LuFins DadL Offline
            LuFins Dad
            wrote on last edited by
            #36

            @jon-nyc said in What the hell were they thinking?:

            @lufins-dad said in What the hell were they thinking?:

            If it’s not criminal, then how can he be impeached for High Crime?

            Because ‘high crimes and misdemeanors’ is a concept that goes back to the Middle Ages and doesn’t mean ‘a violation of federal statute’.

            This is actually worse than the 2019 impeachment and is in fact weakening the impeachment power by Congress.

            I think you will come to think otherwise in the fullness of time.

            We’re talking crime and criminality... Pretty basic concept.

            Unless an investigation shows Trump actually conspiring with QAnon, I doubt my opinion will change much.

            I still stand by my original statement, I CAN see criminal charges being brought against Trump and would not personally mind... But I do doubt that he would be convicted.

            But either way, a 2 hour speech fest by the House with no evidence, no investigation, no testimony? That’s a fvcking joke and always will be.

            The Brad

            jon-nycJ 1 Reply Last reply
            • kluursK Offline
              kluursK Offline
              kluurs
              wrote on last edited by
              #37

              Some of the folks who have been identified.

              A former Navy Seal who boasted of breaking into the Capitol.

              It appears a few police were involved in the assault and the notion that the invaders were unarmed has been disproved.

              The Chicago Tribune reports on this guy - "“We will surround the (expletive) White House and we will kill any (expletive) Democrat that steps on the (expletive) lawn,” Chicago Heights resident Louis Capriotti allegedly said in a Dec. 29 voicemail left for a U.S. House member."

              People not using their best judgment.

              MikM 1 Reply Last reply
              • LuFins DadL LuFins Dad

                @xenon said in What the hell were they thinking?:

                @lufins-dad said in What the hell were they thinking?:

                @xenon said in What the hell were they thinking?:

                @lufins-dad said in What the hell were they thinking?:

                @jon-nyc said in What the hell were they thinking?:

                @lufins-dad

                Why do you take the rally on the 6th as your t=0?

                Why were they even there? How many of these clowns knew what the significance of Jan 6th was before November? Or even before Trump promoted it?
                Why did 10s of millions absorb the stolen election memetic complex?
                Why did the movement get so much oxygen in right wing media?
                Why did Wood and Powell get so much attention?
                How many 10s of millions of people did he promote Flynn’s tweets to?

                Does any of that stand up to Brandenburg? That’s a decision for the courts. Not you, not me, and sure as hell not Nancy Pelosi. So let’s put it to them.

                If you killed someone’s mother in front of them and the killer got killed in retaliation, that wouldn’t stand up to the Brandenburg test either.

                WTF? I don’t even see the analogy you are shooting for?

                Brandenburg is specifically the benchmark for incitement to violence by public speech.

                You can get people riled up to the point of crime, without being criminally liable for riling them up.

                So you’re saying Bernie is responsible for the gunman that attacked the congressional softball event? Good to know. And should we even talk about Obama’s “They bring a knife, then we bring a gun!”

                The actual violent nutjobs were obviously not influenced by Trump’s words. If they were then they would have peacefully and patriotically made their voices heard.

                What that has to do with answering one criminally violent and horrendous act with another violent and horrendous act escapes me.

                X Offline
                X Offline
                xenon
                wrote on last edited by xenon
                #38

                @lufins-dad said in What the hell were they thinking?:

                @xenon said in What the hell were they thinking?:

                @lufins-dad said in What the hell were they thinking?:

                @xenon said in What the hell were they thinking?:

                @lufins-dad said in What the hell were they thinking?:

                @jon-nyc said in What the hell were they thinking?:

                @lufins-dad

                Why do you take the rally on the 6th as your t=0?

                Why were they even there? How many of these clowns knew what the significance of Jan 6th was before November? Or even before Trump promoted it?
                Why did 10s of millions absorb the stolen election memetic complex?
                Why did the movement get so much oxygen in right wing media?
                Why did Wood and Powell get so much attention?
                How many 10s of millions of people did he promote Flynn’s tweets to?

                Does any of that stand up to Brandenburg? That’s a decision for the courts. Not you, not me, and sure as hell not Nancy Pelosi. So let’s put it to them.

                If you killed someone’s mother in front of them and the killer got killed in retaliation, that wouldn’t stand up to the Brandenburg test either.

                WTF? I don’t even see the analogy you are shooting for?

                Brandenburg is specifically the benchmark for incitement to violence by public speech.

                You can get people riled up to the point of crime, without being criminally liable for riling them up.

                So you’re saying Bernie is responsible for the gunman that attacked the congressional softball event? Good to know. And should we even talk about Obama’s “They bring a knife, then we bring a gun!”

                The actual violent nutjobs were obviously not influenced by Trump’s words. If they were then they would have peacefully and patriotically made their voices heard.

                What that has to do with answering one criminally violent and horrendous act with another violent and horrendous act escapes me.

                I think we might have listened to the same Ben Shapiro podcast.

                Bernie could have riled up the shooter by railing against Congressmen who cater to the rich (or something). But is it reasonable to expect or foresee that Bernie’s political positions lead to violence?

                For Trump, he’s telling people he won a landslide election. Then that election was stolen. Then he was stonewalled by all the courts in the land. Is it reasonable to foresee that some people could resort to violence if they believe their democracy has literally been stolen and they have no representation?

                EDIT: I dunno what the specific context on Obama”s quote is ( “They bring a knife, then we bring a gun!”) - but that just seems like prudent self-defense. 🙂

                One more thought on Trump. Even if there were no violence by the mob, why is he sending them to the Capitol to pressure the Vice President to do something unconstitutional? He’s the principal defender of the constitution and we keep treating him with kid gloves for some reason.

                1 Reply Last reply
                • LuFins DadL LuFins Dad

                  @jon-nyc said in What the hell were they thinking?:

                  @lufins-dad said in What the hell were they thinking?:

                  If it’s not criminal, then how can he be impeached for High Crime?

                  Because ‘high crimes and misdemeanors’ is a concept that goes back to the Middle Ages and doesn’t mean ‘a violation of federal statute’.

                  This is actually worse than the 2019 impeachment and is in fact weakening the impeachment power by Congress.

                  I think you will come to think otherwise in the fullness of time.

                  We’re talking crime and criminality... Pretty basic concept.

                  Unless an investigation shows Trump actually conspiring with QAnon, I doubt my opinion will change much.

                  I still stand by my original statement, I CAN see criminal charges being brought against Trump and would not personally mind... But I do doubt that he would be convicted.

                  But either way, a 2 hour speech fest by the House with no evidence, no investigation, no testimony? That’s a fvcking joke and always will be.

                  jon-nycJ Offline
                  jon-nycJ Offline
                  jon-nyc
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #39

                  @lufins-dad said in What the hell were they thinking?:

                  We’re talking crime and criminality... Pretty basic concept.

                  Are we? Seems like you’re floating back and forth between criminal prosecution and impeachment. Maybe you’re not not aware how different they are.

                  Only non-witches get due process.

                  • Cotton Mather, Salem Massachusetts, 1692
                  1 Reply Last reply
                  • kluursK Offline
                    kluursK Offline
                    kluurs
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #40

                    59f8a8ce-9aa5-4d88-8472-2ab668084023-image.png

                    taiwan_girlT 1 Reply Last reply
                    • jon-nycJ Offline
                      jon-nycJ Offline
                      jon-nyc
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #41

                      Some of these guys are going to learn the hard way why their grandfathers wore hoods.

                      Only non-witches get due process.

                      • Cotton Mather, Salem Massachusetts, 1692
                      HoraceH 1 Reply Last reply
                      • jon-nycJ Offline
                        jon-nycJ Offline
                        jon-nyc
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #42

                        Lol.

                        Only non-witches get due process.

                        • Cotton Mather, Salem Massachusetts, 1692
                        1 Reply Last reply
                        • kluursK kluurs

                          59f8a8ce-9aa5-4d88-8472-2ab668084023-image.png

                          taiwan_girlT Offline
                          taiwan_girlT Offline
                          taiwan_girl
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #43

                          @kluurs said in What the hell were they thinking?:

                          59f8a8ce-9aa5-4d88-8472-2ab668084023-image.png

                          What is the three finger wave that a lot of people in the picture are doing?

                          Aqua LetiferA Doctor PhibesD 2 Replies Last reply
                          • taiwan_girlT taiwan_girl

                            @kluurs said in What the hell were they thinking?:

                            59f8a8ce-9aa5-4d88-8472-2ab668084023-image.png

                            What is the three finger wave that a lot of people in the picture are doing?

                            Aqua LetiferA Offline
                            Aqua LetiferA Offline
                            Aqua Letifer
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #44

                            @taiwan_girl said in What the hell were they thinking?:

                            What is the three finger wave that a lot of people in the picture are doing?

                            Proud Boy shit.

                            Please love yourself.

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            • X Offline
                              X Offline
                              xenon
                              wrote on last edited by
                              #45

                              1 Reply Last reply
                              • jon-nycJ Offline
                                jon-nycJ Offline
                                jon-nyc
                                wrote on last edited by
                                #46

                                Jesus.

                                Only non-witches get due process.

                                • Cotton Mather, Salem Massachusetts, 1692
                                Doctor PhibesD 1 Reply Last reply
                                • taiwan_girlT taiwan_girl

                                  @kluurs said in What the hell were they thinking?:

                                  59f8a8ce-9aa5-4d88-8472-2ab668084023-image.png

                                  What is the three finger wave that a lot of people in the picture are doing?

                                  Doctor PhibesD Online
                                  Doctor PhibesD Online
                                  Doctor Phibes
                                  wrote on last edited by
                                  #47

                                  @taiwan_girl said in What the hell were they thinking?:

                                  What is the three finger wave that a lot of people in the picture are doing?

                                  https://www.npr.org/2019/09/26/764728163/the-ok-hand-gesture-is-now-listed-as-a-symbol-of-hate

                                  I was only joking

                                  1 Reply Last reply
                                  • jon-nycJ jon-nyc

                                    Jesus.

                                    Doctor PhibesD Online
                                    Doctor PhibesD Online
                                    Doctor Phibes
                                    wrote on last edited by
                                    #48

                                    @jon-nyc said in What the hell were they thinking?:

                                    Jesus.

                                    TDS

                                    I was only joking

                                    1 Reply Last reply
                                    • RenaudaR Offline
                                      RenaudaR Offline
                                      Renauda
                                      wrote on last edited by
                                      #49

                                      No doubt about it, they were there to rumble and rumble they did.

                                      Elbows up!

                                      Aqua LetiferA 1 Reply Last reply
                                      • RenaudaR Renauda

                                        No doubt about it, they were there to rumble and rumble they did.

                                        Aqua LetiferA Offline
                                        Aqua LetiferA Offline
                                        Aqua Letifer
                                        wrote on last edited by
                                        #50

                                        @renauda said in What the hell were they thinking?:

                                        No doubt about it, they were there to rumble and rumble they did.

                                        I have it on pretty good authority that they were there in a tourist capacity.

                                        Please love yourself.

                                        LuFins DadL RenaudaR 2 Replies Last reply
                                        • jon-nycJ jon-nyc

                                          Some of these guys are going to learn the hard way why their grandfathers wore hoods.

                                          HoraceH Offline
                                          HoraceH Offline
                                          Horace
                                          wrote on last edited by
                                          #51

                                          @jon-nyc said in What the hell were they thinking?:

                                          Some of these guys are going to learn the hard way why their grandfathers wore hoods.

                                          Thanks for going there. You're here to help.

                                          Education is extremely important.

                                          jon-nycJ 1 Reply Last reply
                                          Reply
                                          • Reply as topic
                                          Log in to reply
                                          • Oldest to Newest
                                          • Newest to Oldest
                                          • Most Votes


                                          • Login

                                          • Don't have an account? Register

                                          • Login or register to search.
                                          • First post
                                            Last post
                                          0
                                          • Categories
                                          • Recent
                                          • Tags
                                          • Popular
                                          • Users
                                          • Groups