American Politics Discussion Thread

[Commodore]

AOC and MTG both seem like they're on the same side to me. That is, the side of "distracting Congress from getting me my $2,000".

[T-hawk]

Everybody jumped directly to ad-hominem bashing Ben Shapiro and nobody bothered to address the point I actually made.

Ocasio-Cortez was deliberately trying to mislead with a false image that she was in the Capitol or that the rioting was at her office building when it wasn't. To the point of trying to remove Twitter and Facebook posts that said otherwise.

That's before we get to any of the subjective stuff about fearfulness or milking it for victimhood or whatever. If Ben Shapiro was wrong about any of that first part, tell me.

I think it's difficult for Republicans to accept the Capitol attack as domestic terrorism because it hits so close to home.

We don't see it that way because we understand the underlying motivation. If you're calling it an insurrection or coup or whatever, you're believing the fake news fearmongering. They were trying to save democracy, in their view, by defending what should have been a legitimately elected administration, not overturning one.

[darrelljs]

I've been advised not to sell my MTG cards until those checks are in the mail, so it's annoying me as well.

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/aoc-capitol-attack/

What's True
Ocasio-Cortez wasn't in the main Capitol building where the House and Senate Chambers are located.

What's False
However, Ocasio-Cortez never claimed to be in the main Capitol building. When the attack on the Capitol began, Ocasio-Cortez was, as she stated, in her congressional office, which is located in a network of office buildings immediately surrounding the Capitol, and her office building was one of the two buildings that were evacuated.

Darrell

[T-hawk]

Snopes is as biased as anywhere else. They cite exactly the things that Ocasio-Cortez exaggerated in retelling the story.

She talked about the "loud violent banging" and yelling "where is she?" Which were people who came to help and protect her. She "felt" that the attackers were about to breach that building, when that wasn't true at all. She didn't know those in that instant, but quickly learned it and completely knew that in making that video, yet still used those images to play up the overblown image of danger.

I could perhaps accept that Ocasio-Cortez herself wasn't quite as misleading as Shapiro claims, but it's certainly true that she's complicit in letting the media blow up the image for her.

[Jowy]

Everybody jumped directly to ad-hominem bashing Ben Shapiro and nobody bothered to address the point I actually made.

Ocasio-Cortez was deliberately trying to mislead with a false image that she was in the Capitol or that the rioting was at her office building when it wasn't.  To the point of trying to remove Twitter and Facebook posts that said otherwise.

That's before we get to any of the subjective stuff about fearfulness or milking it for victimhood or whatever.  If Ben Shapiro was wrong about any of that first part, tell me.

I think it's difficult for Republicans to accept the Capitol attack as domestic terrorism because it hits so close to home.

We don't see it that way because we understand the underlying motivation.  If you're calling it an insurrection or coup or whatever, you're believing the fake news fearmongering.  They were trying to save democracy, in their view, by defending what should have been a legitimately elected administration, not overturning one.

I call it what it was: Terrorism. Ignorance is not a valid excuse to commit acts of terror. Any decent human being denounces the attack. That is why it's so mindblowing that even afterwards there are still Republicans who support the terrorist attack and even make jokes at the expense of the survivors. Your case shows why. These people live in their own bubbles, believing lies and conspiracy theories and dismissing anything that clashes with their world view as "fake news". There's a reason why even people inside the party are calling it a cult.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-t...A1275?il=0

[Amicalola]

I think it's difficult for Republicans to accept the Capitol attack as domestic terrorism because it hits so close to home.

We don't see it that way because we understand the underlying motivation.  If you're calling it an insurrection or coup or whatever, you're believing the fake news fearmongering.  They were trying to save democracy, in their view, by defending what should have been a legitimately elected administration, not overturning one.

This one's tricky, but I think you're missing a key issue regarding terrorism. 

Terrorists almost always believe they are ultimately in the right through an underlying motivation. It would be tricky to internally justify their actions otherwise. It isn't the intention that designates an act as terrorism, it is the intended outcome. Think about a religious terrorist, or an eco-terrorist. We know that the outcomes of their actions are terrorism; I am sure they would tell you differently.

[Gustaran]

We don't see it that way because we understand the underlying motivation.  If you're calling it an insurrection or coup or whatever, you're believing the fake news fearmongering.  They were trying to save democracy, in their view, by defending what should have been a legitimately elected administration, not overturning one.

The Twin Towers were blown up by people believing to do a good deed and fullfilling God's wishes. All terrorists follow a subjective motivation, but that doesn't change the fact that they are terrorists.
Or would you say "Don't believe the fearmongering media, the 9/11 terrorists just wanted to follow God's word, so they were just acting according to their interpretation of a holy book. So they are not actually terrorists, but noble warriors, because they thought they were defending their religious beliefs and purging the world of a great evil".

You claim that these insurrectionists are mislead die-hard democrats is completely ridiculous. All of them would have happily cheered Trump, if he had declared himself a dictator and wouldn't have lifted a finger to support Biden in order to save democracy.

And just because people decide to get their news solely from youtube conspiracy videos doesn't absolve them of any guilt. You broke the law, you pay the price. What happened to personal responsibility? Isn't there a popular phrase on the right: "Don't do the crime if you can't do the time?

[civac2]

The people in the examples you gave would and do mostly understand that what they are doing is terrorism.

I agree with T-Hawk in this case. Call the events at the capitol a riot maybe. Anything more than that is hysteria.

[darrelljs]

I call them insurrectionists.

Darrell

[Bobchillingworth]

The people in the examples you gave would and do mostly understand that what they are doing is terrorism.

I agree with T-Hawk in this case. Call the events at the capitol a riot maybe. Anything more than that is hysteria.

What's your argument here? Because you think the insurrectionists were more deluded than terrorists, their attempt to overturn the results of the election via violence was actually not an insurrection, because it didn't meet the insurrectionist's standards of one? What matters is what happened, not how they may or may not have perceived their own actions (and, to be clear, many of them were fully cognizant and vocal about their intent to impose their preferred leader by force and execute government officials who opposed them).