Many more people will die from Ohio's new stand your ground because a black person walking up to a white person is inherently threatening.

No, you cannot discern an inherent threat from a man’s skin-color.

I don't even know what NOS stands for.

That’s me.

She was veteran storming the capitol building only to be gunned down by police. It’s tragic.

Yes and that is bad. Indeed Trump's presidency began with riots and the country is deeply polarized. An invasion though of these building is something different than a riot or a threatening situation. I wonder actually why you think the White House was not taken by protesters / rioteers. That is a serious question by the way, I am interested in your take on it.

I think it was a mix of good fencing and police force. But you’re right. I don’t know why these people were allowed to get in the capitol building, or why they bothered to do so.

They probably don’t work right now, what with our trial run of socialism. Either way, I think we have a different conception of patriotism.

But I agree with you about the Republicans. They are an essential part of the Uniparty.

Yeah, also in Pelosi's office? I was blissfully unaware your seats of government were stormed on a regular basis.

Or was it rioting? Something that is not to be condoned of course and a cause for arrest, but it is different from storming a government building. There is a reason why such places are often heavily guarded. The same reason why the US govt objects when in another country their buildings are stormed and rightly so. They also discriminate between riots and the storming of government building, the harassments of journalists etc.

Also, not too long ago there were riots immediately outside of the Whitehouse, in May I think. It turned quite violent and destructive, with the president sent to his bunker.

All of this started from day one, Trump’s inauguration, outside of which was a riot. Politics has been heated ever since.

Ohh, was a woman shot, bombs found in the halls, thugs breaking windows? Or was it a war of words in which eventually the outcome of democratic procedure was accepted?

Well, something like 80 people were arrested. But I’m not comparing the two.

It was internet-roots, stewed in conspiracy theories for years. It's all fantasy.

Don't you realize that?

Far better than the state, corporate and media-funded conspiracies we’ve all had to listen too for years now. It was only a few days ago former pentagon officials and their media propagandists were warning us that Trump might use the military to remain in power. Instead he called for peace and for people to go home.

When did leftists storm the Capitol?

Probably the Kavanaugh hearing. I believe the new Vice President even spoke there.

I excused myself from work just to watch the livestreams. What a day.

This was grassroots civil disobedience at its finest, not that corporate-funded, celebrity-endorsed astroturfing we’ve been inundated with for the past few years.

Though the most racist and money-grubbing organization of the last millennia has once again taken power, a growing party of working class patriots forms beneath them. As Trump’s power wanes the movement he championed will carry on.

You’ve shown adequately why one shouldn’t appeal to the dictionary. At best dictionaries record current usage of a term, not what it should or should not mean, nor what it has meant in the past or what it might might mean in the future. It’s ridiculous to confine a discussion to a dictionary definition.

But the purpose here is to draw attention to people who claim as a matter of right under freedom to do what they want...

I enjoy your take on duty and freedom, but I depart from the logic after we leave Kant’s thinking and venture into your own.

If I recall correctly, Kant mostly limits his coercion to those who hinder freedom, so I’m not sure he would advocate penalizing those “who claim as a matter of right under freedom to do what they want”.

I think it’s laudable to say one has a duty to be safe and avoid the risk of harm, and one is free to do so, but once this principle is forced upon others or they are penalized for risk, I think we have the realm of freedom into its opposite.

Have you watched any of the 'stop the steal' protests? The speakers, before indicating where supporters can donate money to the cause, literally do their best to inspire religious fervor in their audience, with countless appeals to God in the fight against evil. Frankly, it's surprising that it's not more effective. I suppose this demonstrates how religious faith is in decline, or rather that it's really about tribalism and not actual faith for many.

The phone conversation between Trump and the Georgia secretary of state is yet more evidence that Trump doesn't need to be demonized. His character and selfish motivations are painfully apparent.

I have seen what you described. A lot of these people are god-fearing people, and the language of good and evil suffices to describe what they’re up against. I do fear that it is only a matter of time until they resort to violence, not just against those disrupting their gatherings, censoring and beating them, but also innocent people.

Religious faith, to me, has not disappeared, but been has recast towards other orthodoxies such as social justice, intersectionality and critical race theory. I also believe that the nascent demand for moral leadership from our politicians is one aspect of that. A transactional president like Trump is virtually foreign to them, and it’s why all this piffle about “healing” and “coming together” worked so well for Biden.

No, I said I understand Trump’s paranoia. He’s their folk devil, and they exhibit the religious fervor of a moral panic. He cannot trust anyone.

I don't see much evidence for "widespread voter fraud", a phrase commonly uttered in the gutter-press. But I understand Trump's paranoia. Entire institutions, even within his own government, have been weaponized against him. So I wouldn't mind seeing an audit of some sort.

Whether or not the activity is illegal you express love for this sort of activity. In other words, you love it when a president appears to uses their power to pressure a secretary of state to commit voter fraud. Good people don't love such things. Or perhaps you love it when Trump begs like a whiny dog?

A far more adept politician would buckle under the public pressure, but instead Trump is doing right by his constituents, most of whom believe Biden is illegitimate and voter fraud affected the outcome. That’s why I love it.

What illegal activity are you suggesting?

The point isn’t to try convincing you of illegal activity, the point is that you “love” such activity, and that a person who loves this sort of activity is not a good person.

I never said I love “illegal activity”. This is why we get strange conclusions from false premises, or in this case, lies.

Is Assange really in jail and solitary confinement because he failed to appear in court in connection with allegations of sexual misconduct that have since been formally dropped due to lack of evidence? This is a stain on the UK justice system.

It holds more weight than starting vast investigations premised on rumors, such as crossfire hurricane and the Mueller report.

They should investigate all the states. They should investigate both parties. I see nothing wrong with an independent, transparent investigation, and nothing you've said convinces me otherwise.

Your name-calling is about as suspect as your stoicism.

"Apparently engaging in illegal activity". For what, exactly?

Except that isn't true. Winning Georgia means he still loses overall.

Also he's been at this for 2 months and he lost all of his court cases. As someone on the left I can definitely say that I'm tired of winning at this point.

The president is clearly talking about winning Georgia.

Aren't you from the UK? What have you won?

Like I said, an independent and transparent investigation would be required. Instead we get the opposite, and we are left taking the word of the same officials who told us to accept the results in the first place.

Call me what you want, Tim. I just don't care. You've called me evil, a liar, a bad man, and have compared me to almost every animal in a menagerie. What does that make you?

So if an Antifa member shot randomly into a crowd of fascists, Antifa are in the clear?

And therefore one member's personal decision to kill someone is precisely what makes it not his personal responsibility?

Far-right people really will say absolutely anything m

In America, there used to be a right to go to rallies and protests without outside interference from the government or violent mobs. Given that they routinely suppress this human right, I'm surprised Antifa didn't get worse.

There is no "reason" to be had in this. Whatever reason there may have been has been addressed and more than addressed. But you adduce reason. I do not accuse; I state fact. And in consideration of, on the basis of many, many of your posts, you are represented in them as a bad man. And I take you as such.

Yes I think the fact that it was a close race, a difference of around 12000 votes out of 5 or so million, warrants a closer look at the results, especially given the claims of fraud and irregularity. Either way, refusing the claims of election officials, there is no way to know without an independent, transparent audit of some sort.

No; you accuse. Your accusations are myriad, yet always without sufficient basis. They are pitiful in the way that your accusations seem to be for your own benefit, like you're trying to justify your own poor reasoning.

This is a strategic weakness of liberal democracy, as noted by Schmitt. Free speech absolutism provides absolutely no defence against bad faith and subversive actors from within the system, in fact all that is needed to be done to get people on the side of bad faith actors is for them to claim they are being silenced. So long as liberal democracy is willing to hold free speech to such high regard it risks facing the bad conclusion of the paradox of tolerance; erosion of the very norms that were protected. So long as people side with these bad faith actors, antifascist action will be required as a counterbalance to defend liberal norms. An unglamorous job, as everyone hates them for it.

I don’t think it’s the case that one is “on the side of bad faith actors” when defending their right to speak, though guilt by association is almost inevitable (see Chomsky and the Faurisson affair, for instance). One can defend a person’s right to speak without endorsing any of their views.

But more, the paradox of intolerance is that we should not tolerate the intolerant, those that refuse to listen to argument and thus resort to bigotry and violence, for instance the latest iteration of American Antifa. When I am unable to distinguish this species of "antifascist action" from violent bigotry, I must oppose it, with violence if necessary.

So far, at the most charitable, you are a slanderer and defamer, because all you can do is accuse. I need a little more than the accusation, Tim.

Trump has stated that he will do everything within his power, legally and constitutionally, to contest the results, which is his right. Of course, the Uniparty media never reported on that.

According to Trump, all he needs to do is find around 12,000 ballots to win, which is more than enough reason to contest the results.

I’ve read the Doctrine of Fascism. The illiberal, collectivist and statist sentiments rendered it completely useless, even as a historical curiosity, and I immediately lost interest in anything related to it. What else can be said of Italian Fascism besides how it once manifested and quickly failed in Europe?

Perfect Trumpian phone call. I love it. Though I cannot see how the gutter-press and their base are making a big deal of it, it’s not unusual that the palace intrigue and deep-state gossip has them in a huff. More of the same.

Trump administration declassifies unconfirmed intel on Chinese bounties

We had some pretty heated discussions on “Russian bounties” in Afghanistan. The story reached a fever’s pitch earlier in the year leading to Dems and their followers (and many on this board) using the story to bash Trump, while the administration went so far as to say rogue elements within the intelligence community were trying to undermine the president’s peace talks with the Taliban.

Now we have uncorroborated reports of “Chinese bounties” of an oddly similar nature. I’ll wait to see if those who lamented Russian bounties will show the same outrage, but somehow I doubt it.

I don’t care if you believe it or not. I’m just expressing what I believe.

Trump golfs, sure, and he also works while golfing, something the misinformed like to suppress. As Lindsey Graham said:

“We’d hit a shot, take a phone call. Hit a shot, take a phone call. Hit a shot, talk about what’s a good deal. It was a very intense Christmas Day.”

It’s just how he works. He’s gotten more done on the golf course than other presidents have gotten off of it, which is pretty sad.

Populism or not, it’s the right thing to do.

Trump was probably not involved in the painstaking negotiations, so I’m not sure your little scenario is analogous. The conflation between Trump and those who actually negotiated the bill (indeed, between him, his party, and his entire administration) seems to be the common misinformation of a certain narrative. But history shows Trump goes against his own administration and party quite regularly.

Trump is the most admired man in America for 2020, according to Gallup. Obama placed second. Biden was third.

https://news.gallup.com/poll/328193/donald-trump-michelle-obama-admired-2020.aspx

You neglected to mention the recision request, probably because it wasn’t reported on.

As President, I have told Congress that I want far less wasteful spending and more money going to the American people in the form of $2,000 checks per adult and $600 per child.

As President I am demanding many rescissions under the Impoundment Control Act of 1974. The Act provides that, “whenever the President determines that all or part of any budget authority will not be required to carry out the full objectives or scope of programs for which it is provided, or that such budget authority should be rescinded for fiscal policy or other reasons (including termination of authorized projects or activities for which budget authority has been provided), the President shall transmit to both Houses of Congress a special message” describing the amount to be reserved, the relevant accounts, the reasons for the rescission, and the economic effects of the rescission. 2 U.S.C. § 683.

I will sign the Omnibus and Covid package with a strong message that makes clear to Congress that wasteful items need to be removed. I will send back to Congress a redlined version, item by item, accompanied by the formal rescission request to Congress insisting that those funds be removed from the bill.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/statement-from-the-president-122720/

This means he can withhold “pork” for 45 legislative session days. Though I suspect a congress drunk on spending will refuse to remove any of it, it may just give Americans time to object.

Trump listened to Americans instead of his party and administration, and raised a stink about it. Now my family, nearly broken by state and local government-enforced shutdowns, could get some more of their taxpayer dollars back instead of seeing it spent on gender programs in Pakistan.

Edit: McConnel blocked the increase of stimulus checks for Americans

It makes little sense to sign such a wasteful spending bill, while at the same time leaving little for everyday Americans. Despite your fantasies about Trump’s mind states, Congress has the power of the purse. It’s congress’ fault they left it so late. It’s congress’ fault it’s full of wasteful spending. It’s congress’ fault there is little left for Americans. It’s suspicious, but not surprising, that your fake concern for everyday Americans is used in the tacit defense of those who wronged them.

Nice write-up, ssu.

It seems to me that language and culture are intimately linked, maybe even one and the same, at least insofar as culture is conveyed through language.

But if the two are distinct, does the death of language lead to the decay of culture, or is it the other way about? The Rosetta Stone, for instance, the “language”, persists to the present day, much longer than the cultures that it is derived from.

Buried lede.

Subsequently, Rep. Rob Wittman, R-Va., attempted to get lawmakers to reconsider aspects of the spending bill related to foreign aid. That move was blocked by Democrats.

GOP blocks House Democrats' attempt to pass $2,000 stimulus checks

They were infused into one package, which only helped to amplify Congress’ priorities: chump-change for Americans while bleading the country dry.

No other president has been pathetic enough to posture this way, sure.

I suspect the anti-Trumpism is working overtime to churn out excuses as to why Trump shouldn’t be applauded for his criticism. Assume (without evidence) he has malicious intentions in order to avoid agreement. Pathetic indeed.

It’s true. Selling out Americans and bleeding the country dry is nothing new. What is new is a president who is willing to push back against Congress. I don’t recall Bush or Obama pushing back against the recovery act.