Jan 6 Hearings

[hollodero]

(08-01-2022, 05:31 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Yes, I would agree with your take on the first clip, if it was an isolated incident.  However, those kind of veiled threats are a big part of her repertoire as the later clip shows.  Given her history I don't think you can look at the first clip in a vacuum.

Maybe not. But on the other hand, not doing it in a vacuum more or less unaovoidably lets expectations factor into the judgment, and that's a fine line.

(08-01-2022, 05:31 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Also, she's a horrible person and utterly corrupt.

I will not found a fan club.

(08-01-2022, 05:31 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: I totally agree, there's certainly a difference in degree.  I also completely get your point about "whataboutism".  However, I would counter that right wing violence gets much more MSM coverage than left wing, hence those comparison are frequently made to bring some balance to the topic.  Note, I do not think that is the case in this thread, as the people making that point aren't exactly credible in that regard.  But outside of here, in the general public, I do think that this point is made largely to add balance, or to address the imbalance.

OK, I get this thought, but imho that's also a fine line. In short, if one has an issue with the media's one-sided coverage, one can complain about it, or one can mimic that behaviour in the name of balance. I find it tough to do both. In the end, this will always lead to escalatory means and a chicken vs. egg debate on who's to blame. And I would be especially opposed to the idea when it's about downplaying the Capitol storm through false equivalencies in the name of balance. I get it, but I'm not buying it.

(08-01-2022, 05:31 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Which I normally get, but not when it involves property destruction and injury, including death, on the scale that we witnessed.  As another example of the extreme leaning towards leftist causes, look at the Covid restrictions that were being enforced at that time.  People were told to quarantine as much as possible.  Oh, unless you want to gather in huge crowds to protest, then Covid isn't a big deal at all.

Yeah, I recognized that too. The defense for that I came up with would be that enforcing restrictions is a tough call to make even for a supporter of covid measures. If you insist on quarantine laws, maybe forcibly disperse protesters even, it's adding fuel to the fire. These people were angry and at least in my perspective, they had plenty reason to be. Now authorities forbid black protests? Imho a difficult position.

(08-01-2022, 05:31 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: A large part of the sentence was due to the conspiracy charges.  Conspiracy on its own is a big deal, but you throw in domestic terrorism, which this certainly was, and you're in big trouble.

Was it though? I really am uncertain about the definition of that term, but in my own interpretation, I always believed that to be terrorism, a deed must in any case include a distinct plan to potentially kill people. Which, not to diminish burning police cars, these guys possibly did not have. But yeah, just my definition.